Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Nursing Times Research
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Mead, D.
Right arrow Articles by Cook, R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

The performance of nursing in the research stakes: Lessons from the field

Donna Mead

Department of Nursing and Midwifery, University of Glamorgan, Pontypridd

Laurie Moseley

Department of Nursing and Midwifery, University of Glamorgan, Pontypridd

Richard Cook

Department of Nursing and Midwifery, University of Glamorgan, Pontypridd

There have been many complaints in recent years that nursing research has not developed as fully as it should have, together with a suggested explanation that this is largely due to a lack of success in obtaining funding. This lack of success has been attributed to a domination of funding bodies by doctors, who, it is claimed, do not understand or value nursing research. We have examined such claims in two ways. First, a brief historical overview shows that, although there is still a way to go, nursing research has, in recent years, produced useful information, and that this refutes the idea that it is completely undeveloped. Second, a report on a case study on the progress of 217 grant applications to a regional R&D office in the UK challenges the suggested explanation. The limited number of funded proposals from nurses was not due to medical prejudice. Rather it was due to very few nurses putting forward proposals and to many of those proposals being withdrawn voluntarily, usually after the receipt of insensitively-worded referees' commentaries. When nursing proposals were pursued vigorously, they received higher scientific ratings than medical-led proposals, and were, proportionately, more likely to gain funding.

Key Words: Nursing research • Funding • Referees • Grant applications • Methodology

Nursing Times Research, Vol. 2, No. 5, 335-344 (1997)
DOI: 10.1177/174498719700200504


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Journal of Research in NursingHome page
E. White and J. Winstanley
Mapping nursing research: A methodological model
Journal of Research in Nursing, November 1, 2005; 10(6): 661 - 676.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Journal of Research in NursingHome page
E. White
Strengthening the nursing research endeavour: Key strategic factors
Journal of Research in Nursing, July 1, 2005; 10(4): 365 - 368.
[PDF]


Home page
Journal of Research in NursingHome page
A. M. Rafferty, S. Bond, and M. Traynor
Does nursing, midwifery and health visiting need a research council?
Journal of Research in Nursing, September 1, 2000; 5(5): 325 - 335.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Journal of Research in NursingHome page
N. Brocklehurst
Capitulation or consultation? A way forward for nursing research
Journal of Research in Nursing, May 1, 1999; 4(3): 167 - 169.
[PDF]


Home page
Journal of Research in NursingHome page
H. McKenna and C. Mason
Nursing and the wider R&D agenda: Influence and contribution
Journal of Research in Nursing, January 1, 1998; 3(2): 108 - 115.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Journal of Research in NursingHome page
J. Salvage
Evidence-based practice: A mixture of motives?
Journal of Research in Nursing, January 1, 1998; 3(6): 406 - 418.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Journal of Research in NursingHome page
C. Brooker, S. Read, C. J. Morrell, J. Repper, R. Jones, and R. Akehurst
Coming in from the cold? An analysis of research proposals submitted by the Nursing Section at ScHARRI, 1994-1997
Journal of Research in Nursing, January 1, 1997; 2(6): 405 - 413.
[Abstract] [PDF]