IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/jocnur/v15y2006i4p395-402.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The research assessment exercise in nursing: learning from the past, looking to the future

Author

Listed:
  • Rosanne Cecil
  • Kathryn Thompson
  • Kader Parahoo

Abstract

Aims and objectives. The aim of the study was to enable those planning to make submissions to the 2008 Research Assessment Exercise to make informed decisions regarding their research strategies. The objective of the study was to identify the factors that distinguish those units of assessment (Universities and Higher Education Institutions) that were highly rated from those that received a low rating for nursing in the Research Assessment Exercise of 2001. Background. Nursing research differs in kind from other types of biomedical research. There is a tendency for research in nursing to be characterized by an inward‐looking focus and dominated by a concern with the profession itself. Design. The examination of the research output of nursing. Methods. Data from the abstracts of journal articles submitted to the 2001 Research Assessment Exercise for nursing were extracted, classified, collated and analysed. Results. The publications submitted by those in the higher‐rated units showed a greater tendency than those submitted by those in the lower‐rated units to report on a study involving the collection of primary data; to be multi‐authored; to use either qualitative methodology or randomized‐controlled trials; and to focus upon clinical issues and have patients as the subjects of the research. Conclusion. Nursing research is in a process of change and growth and is still of variable quality. The development of research towards patient care and clinical issues, and away from issues relating to the profession itself, is most evident among those units of assessment rated highly in the 2001 Research Assessment Exercise. Relevance to clinical practice. The study indicates that the best of current nursing research is focused upon clinical issues and patient care.

Suggested Citation

  • Rosanne Cecil & Kathryn Thompson & Kader Parahoo, 2006. "The research assessment exercise in nursing: learning from the past, looking to the future," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(4), pages 395-402, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:15:y:2006:i:4:p:395-402
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2702.2006.01353.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2702.2006.01353.x
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1365-2702.2006.01353.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ian McNay, 2003. "Assessing the assessment: An analysis of the UK Research Assessment Exercise, 2001, and its outcomes, with special reference to research in education," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 30(1), pages 47-54, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Roger Watson, 2006. "Editorial: UK research assessment exercise," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(4), pages 377-377, April.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.

      More about this item

      Statistics

      Access and download statistics

      Corrections

      All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:15:y:2006:i:4:p:395-402. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

      If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

      If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

      If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

      For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1365-2702 .

      Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

      IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.