[Research in Italian nursing practice: an extensive review of literature].
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
PURPOSE: To identify orientations in Italian nursing research regarding nursing practice, highlighting strengths, needs for improvement, as well as suggestions and recommendations for promoting the future development of nursing knowledge. METHOD: An extensive review of the literature was conducted (scoping review) by consulting the following databases: PubMed, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Biosis and Scopus, for the time interval between January 2006 and July 2016. RESULTS: Out of a total of 5635 publications, 35 were identified as relevant to the research question. These highlighted the changes implemented by nurses in Italy through their professional actions according to the best available evidence, especially since 2011/2012. Many publications relate to the implementation of new technical procedures or educational systems for patients, but there is a lack of studies that examine the effectiveness of nursing care and its effects on patients. Many studies do not belong within a program of research or larger projects, and virtually none involve participation in international research teams. With regard to the clinical environments in which the studies were conducted, the majority involved hospitals and the focus was mainly on patients in an acute phase of an illness. Few studies have investigated persons with chronic illnesses, the elderly or have been conducted in long-term care settings such as nursing homes. Another finding identified in this review is the prevalence of quantitative studies, with descriptive study designs, the use of questionnaires that were often created ad hoc, and the recruitment of samples from 'convenience' populations. These findings highlight the need to further review orientations in the Italian nursing research literature, focusing attention on emerging clinical priorities. This should be done through a process that balances the needs of nurses and with those the patients. CONCLUSIONS: Italian nursing researchers tend to focus their investigations on technical and educational topics. Theoretical or philosophical frameworks are almost completely missing in the literature, highlighting the need for more work in this area. In most cases, Italian researchers do not seem to follow research tracks based on research priorities, highlighting the need to review practice settings to identify areas that need to be developed, explored or consolidated. For Italian nurses, research is an area that is still under development and consolidation, but with strong potential for the future.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,010 | 0,026 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,023 | 0,025 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,006 | 0,005 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,008 | 0,002 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».