Description of Nurse Scientists in a Large Health Care System

Logsdon, M. Cynthia; Kleiner, Catherine; Oster, Cynthia A.; Smith, Carine; Bergman-Evans, Brenda; Kempnich, Jodeena M.; Hogan, Felicia; Myers, John D.

doi:10.1097/naq.0000000000000237

Cited by 20 publications

(39 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We also found challenges in strategic planning and recruitment, developing a sustained funding model, and legacy planning. Our experience echoes that of other institutions that have reported challenges related to developing a sustainable and well‐integrated model within the existing structures of the academy (Kluijtmans et al, 2017; Logsdon et al, 2017). Lack of clarity of responsibilities and professional identity, role visibility, and managing competing demands may be barriers to sustained success.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 80%

“…Measuring how nurse clinician scientists encourage and support nurses to pursue graduate studies, and help drive a culture of quality of care are examples of these ‘softer’ endpoints (Kluijtmans et al, 2017; Thompson & Schwartz Barcott, 2019). Researchers have proposed including indicators such as attainment of research goals, effectiveness of leadership skills, involvement in clinical nurses’ research projects, and number of presentations facilitated by clinical and research networks (Logsdon et al, 2017). For the UBC Professorship role, both the clinician and the scientist's identities and overlapping activities are recognised as embedded in their responsibilities, with the priority placed on connecting science and practice.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the discipline, there is a perception of impaired professional advancement trajectory compared with standard university appointments. Unveven organisational support within hospitals and universities, and the absence of a network of peers can be discouraging for nurses contemplating their options (Jeffs et al, 2013; Logsdon et al, 2017; Pringle, 2007). Clinician scientists may struggle with insufficient institutional research infrastructure, such as access to analytical and other research staff, or cumbersome financial management across two separate organisations (Patterson Kelly et al, 2013).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Promoting cardiovascular nursing practice and research: A model for a university joint appointment

Lauck

Thorne

Saewyc

et al. 2021

Journal of Clinical Nursing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background University joint appointments promote continuity of academic leadership and the acceleration of nurses’ impact on improved outcomes and health service delivery. The role of university‐appointed and hospital‐located nurse scientists is of growing interest in the academic and clinical settings, and within the nursing profession. There is a pressing need to describe and study models of appointments, responsibilities and contributions to strengthen the integration of this boundary‐crossing role across the continuum of the nursing profession. Aims and Objectives We report on the implementation of the inaugural St. Paul's Hospital and Heart & Stroke Professorship in Cardiovascular Nursing at the University of British Columbia, Vancouver Canada. Discussion This model was based on recommendations provided by nursing to provincial government policy‐makers, co‐created and co‐funded by academic and practice partners. Appointed by the university, the role is primarily located in the hospital, with the target of contributing 75% of time and focus on clinical research and leadership. The position is facilitated by its academic affiliation and the provision of university research and teaching infrastructure. In clinical practice, the role benefits from integration and visibility in the cardiac programme and leadership team, collaboration with advanced practice and multidisciplinary research groups, and access to office and human resources located on the clinical unit. Deliverables centre on achieving adjusted indicators of university performance to support academic promotion, and delivery of a practice‐close research programme that prioritises improved patient outcomes, multidisciplinary practice and improved outcomes. Relevance to Clinical Practice The dual appointment aims to provide tangible benefits to both the university and the hospital that match each organisation's needs; this requires sustained senior leadership engagement and support, and modification of conventional indicators of impact and success. Its ongoing evaluation will elucidate required modifications and future strategies required to strengthen nurses’ academic and clinical leadership.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 80%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Promoting cardiovascular nursing practice and research: A model for a university joint appointment

Lauck

Thorne

Saewyc

et al. 2021

Journal of Clinical Nursing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As a field, we may consider encouraging and involving more PhD prepared speech pathologists in the clinical setting to establish and conduct research and help reduce the length of time it takes for evidence to be implemented into practice. This has been modelled successfully in nursing (Berger & Polivka, 2015;Brant, 2015;Logsdon et al, 2017;Staffileno et al, 2013) and may be a direction to consider. The findings from this scoping review can be used to motivate this much-needed, across population, clinical research on the effectiveness of chewing intervention (Lefton-Greif & Arvedson, 2016).…”

Section: Rangementioning

confidence: 99%

Paediatric oral sensorimotor interventions for chewing dysfunction: A scoping review

Wilson

Simione

Polley

2021

Intl J Lang & Comm Disor

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Chewing dysfunction can have adverse effects on growth, development and quality of life. There is a lack of evidence-based consensus guidelines for sensorimotor intervention. To address this, we need to understand the current state of the science in clinical sensorimotor interventions for paediatric chewing dysfunction and systematically plan a research agenda and priorities for the field. Aims: The purpose of this scoping review was to examine the extent, range and nature of evidence for oral sensorimotor interventions for paediatric chewing dysfunction. Methods & Procedures: This scoping review entailed five phases that included: identification of the research question; identification of relevant studies; study selection; data charting; and collation, summarization and report of the results.Treatment studies that were peer-reviewed and written in English were included. All studies involved a paediatric population and included an oral sensorimotor and/or chewing intervention. Information regarding study design, population, intervention, comparator, outcome measures and findings were extracted. Main Contribution: Of the 21 studies included in this scoping review, 53% were specific to children with cerebral palsy. All interventions were multi-component in nature and the treatment studies included a range of study designs, but few were controlled trials with comparators. A wide variety of outcomes measures were used within and across studies to determine treatment effectiveness. Conclusions & Implications:The findings suggest that in a small number of studies, sensorimotor interventions provide preliminary evidence for effectiveness in specific populations. These and other treatment protocols must be trialled in additional clinical populations and settings to improve the evidence base for sensorimotor treatment of paediatric chewing dysfunction. This review also serves to help prioritize research agendas and further motivates the need for consensus-based clinical guidelines for paediatric chewing treatment.

show abstract

“…As knowledge brokers, CSs have the advantage of habitual, rst-hand experience of clinical work and research processes. This facilitates strategic networking (2) and the involvement of stakeholders (3,4) in designing and executing broker activities that link research and practice (5). Operational involvement in both research and clinical practice, facilitates unique insights into the goals, priorities and organisational logics of both contexts (6).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Enabling visibility of the clinician-scientists’ knowledge broker role in linking research with clinical practice: A participatory design research in the Dutch nursing-home sector

Barry

Kuijer

Persoon³

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Twelve clinician-scientists were employed in a Dutch academic network, which is a collaboration between fifteen nursing-homes and an academic medical research institute. The clinician-scientists were tasked with linking research and clinical practice by catalysing both care-informed research and evidence-informed implementation initiatives. The clinician-scientists and their manager experienced difficulties in clearly defining the knowledge broker role of the clinician-scientists, a difficulty also reported in literature. They found no tools and methods suitable for make their knowledge broker role visible. Clarifying role expectations and accountability for funding these knowledge broker positions was difficult. They aimed to design a theory-informed performance appraisal tool that allowed clinician-scientists to explicate and develop their knowledge broker role in collaboration with management.Methods: A participatory design research was conducted over a 21 month period with a design group consisting of an external independent researcher, clinician-scientists and their managers from within the academic network. Results: A tool (the SP-tool) was developed in MS Excel. This allowed clinician-scientists to log their knowledge broker activities as distinct from their clinical work and research related activities. The tool contributed to their ability to make their knowledge broker role visible to themselves and their stakeholders. The theoretic contribution of the design research is a conceptual model of professionalisation of the clinician scientists knowledge broker role. This model presents the relationship between work visibility and the clarification of functions of the clinician-scientist’s knowledge broker role. In the professionalisation of knowledge-intensive work, visibility contributes to the definition of CS broker functions, which is an element necessary for the professionalisation of an occupation.Conclusions: The CSs knowledge broker role is a knowledge-intensive role and work-tasks associated with this role are not automatically visible. The SP-tool contributes to creating work visibility of the clinician-scientists’ knowledge broker role. This in turn could contribute to the professionalisation of this role, which is not well described in literature at the day-to-day professional level.

show abstract

Description of Nurse Scientists in a Large Health Care System

Cited by 20 publications

References 13 publications

Promoting cardiovascular nursing practice and research: A model for a university joint appointment

Promoting cardiovascular nursing practice and research: A model for a university joint appointment

Paediatric oral sensorimotor interventions for chewing dysfunction: A scoping review

Enabling visibility of the clinician-scientists’ knowledge broker role in linking research with clinical practice: A participatory design research in the Dutch nursing-home sector

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About