Skip to main content
Book cover

Introduction to Nursing Informatics pp 273–294Cite as

Research Applications

  • 2904 Accesses

Part of the Health Informatics book series (HI)

Abstract

Nursing research is a vital part of nursing professional practice, whether the activity is reading and critiquing research in order to use evidence in nursing practice, participate in research, or lead research. This chapter reviews the nursing research process and describes the types of technology available to conduct research with examples of recent research using the technology. Areas covered include idea generation, literature search and review, data collection and analysis tools for quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods research, data and visualization tools. The ethical implications of using new technology for nursing research are briefly discussed and an example area of nursing informatics research is provided.

Keywords

  • Nursing research
  • Qualitative research
  • Quantitative research
  • Mixed methods research
  • Data collection
  • Data analysis
  • Knowledge translation
  • Time-motion studies
  • Informatics

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4471-2999-8_13
  • Chapter length: 22 pages
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
eBook
USD   69.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • ISBN: 978-1-4471-2999-8
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
Softcover Book
USD   89.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
Learn about institutional subscriptions
Fig. 13.1
Fig. 13.2
Fig. 13.3
Fig. 13.4

References

  1. Hannah KJ, Ball MJ, Edwards MJA. Introduction to nursing informatics. 3rd ed. New York: Springer; 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Polit DF, Beck TB. Nursing research: generating and assessing evidence for nursing practice. 9th ed. Philadelphia: Wolters Kluwer Health/Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2012.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Wink DM. Digital books. Nurse Educ. 2011;36(6):233–5.

    PubMed  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  4. Wink DM, Killingsworth EK. Optimizing use of library technology. Nurse Educ. 2011;36(2):48–51.

    PubMed  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  5. Wink DM. Cloud computing. Nurse Educ. 2012;37(1):3–5.

    PubMed  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  6. Wink DM, Killingsworth EK. Beyond Google docs. Nurse Educ. 2012;37(2):45–7.

    PubMed  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  7. Wood MJ, Ross-Kerr JC. Basic steps in planning nursing research. 7th ed. Sudbury: Jones and Bartlett; 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Urquhart C, Currell R, Grant MJ, Hardiker NR. Nursing record systems: effects on nursing practice and healthcare outcomes. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009;(1):CD002099. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD002099.pub2.

  9. Using MeSH. National Center for Biotechnology Information, U S National Library of Medicine 2013. Available from URL: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/mesh.

  10. Davies B, Logan J. Reading research: a user-friendly guide for health professionals. 5th ed. Toronto: Elsevier; 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Westlake C. Practical tips for literature synthesis. Clin Nurse Spec. 2012;26(5):244–9.

    PubMed  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  12. Denzin NK, Lincoln YS. The Sage handbook of qualitative research. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage; 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Shadish WR, Cook TD, Campbell DT. Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for generalized causal inference. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company; 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Creswell JW, Klassen AC, Plano Clark VL, Smith KC for the Office of Behavioral and Social Sciences Research. Best practices for mixed methods research in the health sciences. August 2011. National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD. Retrieved Jan 25 2012. http://obssr.od.nih.gov/mixed_methods_research.

  15. Duff, D. Family concerns and responses following a severe traumatic brain injury: a grounded theory study: Codman Award paper. Axone. 2002; 24(2):14–22.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Creswell JW. Research design: qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage; 2008.

    Google Scholar 

  17. MacLean LM, Meyer M, Estable A. Improving accuracy of transcripts in qualitative research. Qual Health Res. 2004;14:113–23.

    PubMed  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  18. Scott SD, Sharpe H, O’Leary K, Dehaeck U, Hindmarsh K, Moore JG, et al. Court reporters: a viable solution for the challenges of focus group data collection? Qual Health Res. 2009;19(1):140–6.

    PubMed  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  19. Varpio LP, Kuziemsky CP, MacDonald CM, King WJM. The helpful or hindering effects of in-hospital patient monitor alarms on nurses: a qualitative analysis. Comput Inform Nurs. 2012;30(4):210–7.

    PubMed  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  20. Lawton R, Carruthers S, Gardner P, Wright J, McEachan RR. Identifying the latent failures underpinning medication administration errors: an exploratory study. Health Serv Res. 2012;47(4):1437–59.

    PubMed Central  PubMed  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  21. Braun V, Clarke V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual Res Psychol. 2006;3(2):77–101.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  22. Bergin M. NVivo 8 and consistency in data analysis: reflecting on the use of a qualitative data analysis program. Nurse Res. 2011;18(3):6–12.

    PubMed  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  23. Veo PMRN-B. Concept mapping for applying theory to nursing practice. J Nurses Staff Dev. 2010;26(1):17–22.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  24. Hunter Revell SMP. Concept maps and nursing theory: a pedagogical approach. Nurse Educ. 2012;37(3):131–5.

    PubMed  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  25. Maneval RE, Filburn MJ, Deringer SO, Lum GD. Concept mapping. Does it improve critical thinking ability in practical nursing students? Nurs Educ Perspect. 2011;32(4):229–33.

    PubMed  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  26. Huang YC, Chen HH, Yeh ML, Chung YC. Case studies combined with or without concept maps improve critical thinking in hospital-based nurses: A randomized-controlled trial. Int J Nurs Stud. 2012;49(6):747–54.

    PubMed  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  27. Atay S, Karabacak U. Care plans using concept maps and their effects on the critical thinking dispositions of nursing students. Int J Nurs Pract. 2012;18(3):233–9.

    PubMed  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  28. Duncan I, Yarwood-Ross L, Haigh C. YouTube as a source of clinical skills education. Nurse Educ Today. 2013;33(12):1576–80.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Topps D, Helmer J, Ellaway R. YouTube as a platform for publishing clinical skills training videos. Acad Med. 2013;88(2):192–7.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Butler DP, Perry F, Shah Z, Leon-Villapalos J. The quality of video information on burn first aid available on YouTube. Burns. 2013;39:856–9.

    PubMed  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  31. Bellomo R, Ackerman M, Bailey M, Beale R, Clancy G, Danesh V, et al. A controlled trial of electronic automated advisory vital signs monitoring in general hospital wards. Crit Care Med. 2012;40(8):2349–61.

    PubMed  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  32. Atkinson I. Accuracy of data transfer: double data entry and estimating levels of error. J Clin Nurs. 2012;21(19–20):2730–5.

    PubMed  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  33. Barchard KA, Pace LA. Preventing human error: the impact of data entry methods on data accuracy and statistical results. Comput Hum Behav. 2011;27(5):1834–9.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  34. Gregory KE, Radovinsky L. Research strategies that result in optimal data collection from the patient medical record. Appl Nurs Res. 2012;25(2):108–16.

    PubMed Central  PubMed  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  35. Hannah K, White PA. C-HOBIC: standardized clinical outcomes to support evidence-informed nursing care. Nurs Leadersh (Tor Ont). 2012;25(1):43–6.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  36. Jeffs L, Wilson G, Ferris E, Cardiff B, Ng S, Lanceta M, et al. Exploring nurses’ perceptions of collecting and using HOBIC measures to guide clinical practice and improve care. Nurs Leadersh (Tor Ont). 2012;25(1):14–28.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  37. Doran D, Haynes BR, Estabrooks CA, Kushniruk A, Dubrowski A, Bajnok I, et al. The role of organizational context and individual nurse characteristics in explaining variation in use of information technologies in evidence based practice. Implement Sci. 2012;7:122.

    PubMed Central  PubMed  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  38. Lee TT, Lin KC, Mills ME, Kuo YH. Factors related to the prevention and management of pressure ulcers. Comput Inform Nurs. 2012;30(9):489–95.

    PubMed  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  39. Canadian Institutes of Health Research. Knowledge translation and commercialization. Available from http://www.cihr-irsc.gc.ca/e/29418.html.

  40. Gupta S, Wan FT, Newton D, Bhattacharyya OK, Chignell MH, Straus SE. WikiBuild: a new online collaboration process for multistakeholder tool development and consensus building. J Med Internet Res. 2011;13(4):e108.

    PubMed Central  PubMed  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  41. Birnbaum MH. Human research and data collection via the internet. Annu Rev Psychol. 2004;55:803–32.

    PubMed  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  42. Chu JL, Snider CE. Use of a social networking web site for recruiting Canadian youth for medical research. J Adolesc Health. 2013;52(6):792–4.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Whitehead L. Methodological issues in Internet-mediated research: a randomized comparison of internet versus mailed questionnaires. J Med Internet Res. 2011;13(4):e109.

    PubMed Central  PubMed  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  44. Meister D. The history of human factors and ergonomics. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum; 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Zheng K, Guo MH, Hanauer DA. Using the time and motion method to study clinical work processes and workflow: methodological inconsistencies and a call for standardized research. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2011;18(5):704–10.

    PubMed Central  PubMed  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  46. Hendrich A, Chow MP, Skierczynski BA, Lu Z. A 36-hospital time and motion study: how do medical-surgical nurses spend their time? Perm J. 2008;12(3):25–34.

    PubMed Central  PubMed  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  47. Ampt A, Westbrook J, Creswick N, Mallock N. A comparison of self-reported and observational work sampling techniques for measuring time in nursing tasks. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2007;12(1):18–24.

    PubMed  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  48. Endsley M. Design and evaluation for situation awareness enhancement. Thousand OaKs: Sage; 1988. p. 97–101.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Koch SH, Weir C, Westenskow D, Gondan M, Agutter J, Haar M, et al. Evaluation of the effect of information integration in displays for ICU nurses on situation awareness and task completion time: a prospective randomized controlled study. Int J Med Inform. 2013;82(8):665–75.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Ashoori M, Burns C, Momtahan K, d’Entremont B. Control task analysis in action: collaboration in the operating room. Thousand Oaks: Sage; 2011. p. 272–6.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Parush A, Kramer C, Foster-Hunt T, Momtahan K, Hunter A, Sohmer B. Communication and team situation awareness in the OR: implications for augmentative information display. J Biomed Inform. 2011;44(3):477–85.

    PubMed  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  52. Bromiley M, Mitchell L. Would you speak up if the consultant got it wrong? …and would you listen if someone said you’d got it wrong? J Perioper Pract. 2009;19(10):326–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The author wishes to thank the Library Services staff at The Ottawa Hospital for their help in reviewing the literature search section, supplying the list of common databases, the steps in developing a search strategy, and the description of MeSH terms.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Nursing Professional Practice, The Ottawa Hospital and the Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, ON, Canada

    Kathryn Momtahan RN, PhD

Authors
  1. Kathryn Momtahan RN, PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kathryn Momtahan RN, PhD .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Calgary, Alberta, Canada

    Kathryn J. Hannah

  2. Dublin City University, Dublin, Dublin, Ireland

    Pamela Hussey

  3. Global Village Consulting Inc, Merigomish, Nova Scotia, Canada

    Margaret A. Kennedy

  4. IBM Research Center for Healthcare Management, Baltimore, Maryland, USA

    Marion J. Ball

Electronic Supplementary Material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Educational Template (PDF 102 kb)

Educational Template (PPTX 116 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer-Verlag London

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Momtahan, K. (2015). Research Applications. In: Hannah, K., Hussey, P., Kennedy, M., Ball, M. (eds) Introduction to Nursing Informatics. Health Informatics. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-2999-8_13

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-2999-8_13

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, London

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4471-2998-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4471-2999-8

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)