A conceptual framework for scientific writing in nursing

Journal of Nursing Education

Volumn 49, Issue 8, 2010, Pages 437-443

  Regan, Mary ^a   Pietrobon, Ricardo ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND SCHOOL OF NURSING   (United States)

^b DUKE UNIVERSITY HEALTH SYSTEM   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CURRICULUM; EDUCATION; EDUCATIONAL MODEL; HUMAN; METHODOLOGY; MODEL; NURSING EDUCATION; NURSING RESEARCH; ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT; PROFESSIONAL COMPETENCE; PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT; PUBLICATION; PUBLISHING; SCIENCE; STANDARD; WRITING;

CURRICULUM; EDUCATION, NURSING, BACCALAUREATE; HUMANS; MODELS, EDUCATIONAL; MODELS, NURSING; NURSING RESEARCH; PERIODICALS AS TOPIC; PROFESSIONAL COMPETENCE; PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT; PUBLISHING; RESEARCH DESIGN; SCIENCE; WRITING;

EID: 77956028463     PISSN: 01484834     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3928/01484834-20100430-02     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Alley, M. (1996). The craft of scientific writing. Hoboken, NJ: Springer.
2. Barrois, B., Carles, M., Rumeau, M., Tell, L., Toussaint, J.F., Bonnefoy, M., et al. (2007). Efficacy and tolerability of hyaluronan (ialuset) in the treatment of pressure ulcers: A multicentre, non-randomised, pilot study. Drugs in R&D, 8, 267-283.
3. Bickhard, M., & Campbell, D. (2003). Variations in variation and selection: The ubiquity of the variation-and-selective retention ratchet in emergent organizational complexity. Foundations of Science, 8, 215-282.
4. Campbell, D. (1990). Epistemological roles for selection theory. In N. Rescher (Ed.), Evolution, cognition, and realism: Studies in evolutionary epistemology (pp. 1-19). Lanham, MD: University Press of America.
5. Donalson, S., & Crowley, D. (1978). The discipline of nursing. Nursing Outlook, 26, 113-120.
6. Fawcett, J., Watson, J., Neuman, B., Walker, P., & Fitzpatrick, J. (2001). On nursing theories and evidence. Journal of Nursing Scholarship, 33, 115-119.
7. Giere, R. (1987). The cognitive study of science. In N.J. Nersessian (Ed.), The process of science (pp. 139-159). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Martinus Nijhoff.
8. Gieryn, P. (1999). Cultural boundaries of science: Credibility on the line. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
9. Gopen, G., & Swan, D. (1990). The science of scientific writing: If the reader is to grasp what the writer means, the writer must understand what the reader needs. American Scientist, 78, 550-558.
10. Gross, A., Harmon, J., & Reidy, M. (2002). Communicating science: The scientific article from the 17th century to the present. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
11. Heyes, C., & Hull, D.L. (2001). Selection theory and social construction: The evolutionary naturalistic epistemology of Donald T. Campbell. New York, NY: SUNY Press.
12. Hodnett, E. (2002). Pain and women's satisfaction with the experience of childbirth: A systematic review. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 186, S160-S172.
13. Hoey, M. (2001). Textual interaction: An introduction to written discourse analysis. Florence, KY: Routledge.
14. Knorr-Cetina, K. (1999). Epistemic cultures: How the sciences make knowledge. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
15. Lucey, P., & Maurana, C. (2007). Partnerships to address social determinants of health. Nursing Economics, 25, 179-182.
16. Matthews, R. (2007). Successful scientific writing: A step-by-step guide for the biological and medical sciences. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
17. Newman, M., Sime, M., & Corcoran-Perry, S. (1991). The focus of the discipline. Advances in Nursing Science, 14(1), 1-6.
18. Newman, W., & Principe, L. (2002). Alchemy tried in the fire: Starkey, Boyle, and the fate of Helmontian chymistry. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
19. Pietrobon, R., Nielsen, K., Steele, S., Menezes, P., Martins, H., & Jacobs, D.O. (2007). Manuscript architect: A web application for scientific writing in virtual interdisciplinary groups. Biomed Central Medical Informatics and Decision Making, 7(21). Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1963322/
20. Regan, M., & Liaschenko, J. (2007). In the mind of the beholder: Hypothesized effect of intrapartum nurses' cognitive frames of childbirth on the utilization of Cesarean section. Qualitative Health Research, 17, 612-624.
21. Shah, J., Rajor, D., Vaghasia, M., Phadtare, A., Pradhan, S., Carvalho, E., et al. (2010). Writesim TCExam-An open source text simulation environment for training novice researchers in scientific writing. Manuscript submitted for publication.
22. Shah, J., Shah, A., & Pietrobon, R. (2009). Scientific writing of novice researchers: What difficulties and encouragements do they encounter? Academic Medicine, 84, 511-516.
23. Sharpin, S. (1984). Pump and circumstance: Robert Boyle's literary technology. Social Studies of Science, 14, 481-520.
24. Shumway, D., & Messer-Davidow, E. (1991). Disciplinarity. Poetics Today, 12, 201-225.
25. Swale, J. (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
26. Toumlin, S. (1972). Human understanding. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.