↓ Skip to main content

Describing the implementation of an innovative intervention and evaluating its effectiveness in increasing research capacity of advanced clinical nurses: using the consolidated framework for…

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Nursing, May 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (74th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (68th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
36 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
132 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Describing the implementation of an innovative intervention and evaluating its effectiveness in increasing research capacity of advanced clinical nurses: using the consolidated framework for implementation research
Published in
BMC Nursing, May 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12912-017-0214-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gabrielle McKee, Margaret Codd, Orla Dempsey, Paul Gallagher, Catherine Comiskey

Abstract

Despite advanced nursing roles having a research competency, participation in research is low. There are many barriers to participation in research and few interventions have been developed to address these. This paper aims to describe the implementation of an intervention to increase research participation in advanced clinical nursing roles and evaluate its effectiveness. The implementation of the intervention was carried out within one hospital site. The evaluation utilised a mixed methods design and a implementation science framework. All staff in advanced nursing roles were invited to take part, all those who were interested and had a project in mind could volunteer to participate in the intervention. The intervention consisted of the development of small research groups working on projects developed by the nurse participant/s and supported by an academic and a research fellow. The main evaluation was through focus groups. Output was analysed using thematic analysis. In addition, a survey questionnaire was circulated to all participants to ascertain their self-reported research skills before and after the intervention. The results of the survey were analysed using descriptive statistics. Finally an inventory of research outputs was collated. In the first year, twelve new clinical nurse-led research projects were conducted and reported in six peer reviewed papers, two non-peer reviewed papers and 20 conference presentations. The main strengths of the intervention were its promptness to complete research, to publish and to showcase clinical innovations. Main barriers identified were time, appropriate support from academics and from peers. The majority of participants had increased experience at scientific writing and data analysis. This study shows that an intervention, with minor financial resources; a top down approach; support of a hands on research fellow; peer collaboration with academics; strong clinical ownership by the clinical nurse researcher; experiential learning opportunities; focused and with needs based educational sessions, is an intervention that can both increase research outputs and capacity of clinically based nurses. Interventions to further enhance nursing research and their evaluation are crucial if we are to address the deficit of nurse-led patient-centred research in the literature.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 132 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 132 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 21 16%
Researcher 13 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 8%
Student > Bachelor 10 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 5%
Other 28 21%
Unknown 42 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 45 34%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 7%
Social Sciences 9 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 2%
Psychology 3 2%
Other 18 14%
Unknown 45 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 April 2019.
All research outputs
#4,487,762
of 23,047,237 outputs
Outputs from BMC Nursing
#130
of 760 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#79,134
of 310,895 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Nursing
#5
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,047,237 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 760 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 310,895 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.