Hi All out there in the nursing Research/EBP universe.
Notice that TO SEE COMMENTS on the blog post, there is a comments link under blogpost title. In the most recent post, I added info in a comment about Scholar Scams.
Couldn’t resist sharing our beautiful flowers here in SoCal!
Caveat Emptor! (“let the buyer beware”) I got a string of emails that I suspect are phishing to get me to send $$$. Does the emailer assume that I am in some sort of “publish or perish” greed mode?
The likely phisher got in touch with me via ResearchGate. I love ResearchGate. Seriously. It’s a great place to notify interested scholars of peer-reviewed work OR to post your work as ‘grey literature’ (i.e., “usually unpublished [work, including]… research reports, …evaluations, theses, dissertations, webcasts, poster sessions, presentations, conference proceedings, PowerPoint Presentations, etc..” per CSU/LB)
I christened the emails a “scholar scam.” (Please disabuse me of this notion if you know better.) First,I got an email asking if one of my ResearchGate-posted papers had been published. When I 
answered ‘no,’ I got a string of gmails (not “.edu”) attempting to get me to add as author someone who is not an author, then with other requests. Supposedly the advantage for me is to get help publishing. Frankly, I don’t need the help. (If you do, please pick your own reputable scholar friends to assist.)
I suspect that the phisher wants to convince me to PAY with promises of publication. The paying part would be real and the publication part likely imaginary. (BTW: Anyone can pay to publish anytime without anyone else’s help.) I was not yet asked for $$$, but if the emails continue, I expect that to come.
ummm….no thank you….Caveat Emptor!
What do you think? Anyone else receive similar emails?-Dr.H
p.s. the article in question that is fulltext at ResearchGate – Highfield, MEF, Osterhues, DJ, & Chu, L. (2008) Religious & spiritual content in physical therapy curricula: A survey of U.S. program directors. Published on ResearchGate.
Let’s say you want to find out how well students’ think they learned theory in your class.
One option is to do a pre/post test: You distribute the same survey before and after the class asking them to rate on 1-4 scale how well they think they know the new material. Then you compare their ratings.
Another option is to do posttest only: You could give them a survey after the class that 
asks them to rate 1-4 their knowledge before the class and 1-4 their knowledge now. Then you compare their ratings.
One research option is stronger than the other. Which one is it? and Why? (hint: think retrospective/prospective)
I’m not a New Year’s resolution person. I used to be and then I realized that I wanted to hit the restart button more often than every 365 days. So…my aim for this blog remains pretty much unchanged: Make research processes and ideas understandable for every RN.
Although “to be simple is difficult,” that’s my goal. L
et me know what’s difficult for you in research, because it probably is for others as well. Let’s work on the difficult together so that you can use the BEST Evidence in your practice.
The 2019 journey begins today, and tomorrow, and the tomorrows after that!
FOR MORE: Go to PubMed. Search for a topic of interest. Send me the article & we’ll critique together.
Communication is critical to effective dissemination of findings. Enjoy this bit of communication know how!
Enjoy this 2+-minute, homegrown, YouTube video about our 7-year collaborative, EBP/research project recorded per request of a presenter at the Association for Nursing Staff Development conference. (I admit it’s intimidating to watch myself.)
Check out the video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T8KUIt_Uq9k. 
Key points from our efforts: EBP/research learning should be fun. Content, serious!
The related publication that records some of our fun efforts and the full collaborative picture: Highfield, M.E.F., Collier, A., Collins, M., & Crowley, M. (2016). Partnering to promote evidence-based practice in a community hospital: Implications for nursing professional development specialists, Journal of Nursing Staff Development, 32(3):130-6. doi: 10.1097/NND.0000000000000227.
For RNs wanting to pursue a doctorate, it is important to pick a degree that 
best matches your anticipated career path. The shortest simplest explanation of the difference in these degrees is probably:
An excellent, free full-text, critique can be found at https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4547057/
Of course, some DNPs teach in universities, particularly in DNP programs. PhDs may otherwise be better prepared for faculty roles. I encourage you to look carefully at the curriculum at the school where you hope to study and expectations of a university where you hope to teach. Speak with faculty, & choose wisely.
Yes. Change can be painful.
Yes. It is easier to do things the way we’ve always done them (and been seemingly successful).
Yet, most of us want to work more efficiently or improve our own or patients’ health.
So, there you have the problem: a tension between status quo and change. Perhaps taking the easy status quo is why ‘everyday nurses’ don’t read research.
Ralph (2017) writes encountering 3 common mindsets that keep nurses stuck in the rut of refusing to examine new research:
But, he argues, you have a choice: you can go with the status quo or challenge it (Ralph). And (admit it), haven’t we all found that the status quo sometimes doesn’t work well so that we end up
How to begin solving the problem of not reading research? Think of a super-interesting topic to you and make a quick trip to PubMed.com. Check out a few relevant abstracts and ask your librarian to get the articles for you. Read them in the nurses’ lounge so others can, too.
Let me know how your challenge to the status quo works out.
Bibliography: Fulltext available for download through https://www.researchgate.net/ of Ralph, N. (2017 April). Editorial: Engaging with research & evidence is a nursing priority so why are ‘everyday’ nurses not reading the literature, ACORN 30(3):3-5. doi: 10.26550/303/3.5
Reliability & validity are terms that refer to the consistency and accuracy of a quantitative measurement questionnaire, technical device, ruler, or any other measuring device. It means that the outcome measure can be trusted and is relatively error free.
For example: If your bathroom scale measures weight, then it is a valid measure of weight (e.g. it doesn’t measure BP or stress). You might say it had high validity. If your bathroom scale measures your weight as the same thing when you step on and off of it several times then it is measuring weight reliably or consistently; and you might say it has high reliability.
Reposting. Enjoy the review. -Dr.H
Last week’s blog focused on the strongest types of evidence that you might find when trying to solve a clinical problem. These are: #1 Systematic reviews, Meta-analyses, or Evidence-based clinical practice guidelines based on systematic review of RCTs; & #2 Randomized controlled trials. (For levels of evidence from strongest to weakest, see blog “I like my coffee (and my evidence) strong!”)
So after the two strongest levels of evidence what is the next strongest? #3 level is controlled trials without randomization. (Sometimes called quasi-experimental studies.)
Here’s an example of a controlled trial without randomization: I take two groups of mice and test two types of cheese to find out which one mice like best. I do NOT randomly assign the mice to groups. The experimental group #1 loved Swiss cheese, & the control group #2 refused to eat the cheddar. I assume confidently that mice LOVE Swiss cheese…
View original post 196 more words
