Realistic evaluation of an emergency department-based mental health nurse practitioner outpatient service in Australia

Nursing and Health Sciences

Volumn 13, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 199-206

  Wand, Timothy ^a,b   White, Kathryn ^b   Patching, Joanna ^b  

^a ROYAL PRINCE ALFRED HOSPITAL   (Australia)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY   (Australia)

Author keywords

Emergency department; Evaluation; Mental health; Mixed methods; Nurse practitioner; Realistic evaluation

Indexed keywords

AMBULATORY CARE; ARTICLE; AUSTRALIA; EMERGENCY HEALTH SERVICE; EVALUATION; FEASIBILITY STUDY; HUMAN; NURSE PRACTITIONER; NURSING PRACTICE; ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT; QUALITATIVE RESEARCH;

AMBULATORY CARE; AUSTRALIA; EFFICIENCY, ORGANIZATIONAL; EMERGENCY SERVICE, HOSPITAL; EMERGENCY SERVICES, PSYCHIATRIC; FEASIBILITY STUDIES; HUMANS; NURSE PRACTITIONERS; NURSE'S PRACTICE PATTERNS; QUALITATIVE RESEARCH;

EID: 79957572408     PISSN: 14410745     EISSN: 14422018     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1442-2018.2011.00601.x     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Bazeley P. Integrating data analysis in mixed methods research. J. Mix. Methods Res. 2009; 3: 203-207.
2. Bear M, Bowers C. Using a nursing framework to measure client satisfaction at a nurse-managed clinic. Public Health Nurs. 1998; 15: 50-59.
3. Blamey A, Mackenzie M. Theories of change and realistic evaluation. Evaluation 2007; 13: 439-455.
4. Bryman A. Integrating quantitative and qualitative research: how is it done? Qual. Res. 2006; 6: 97-113.
5. Happ MB, Dabbs AD, Tate J, Hricik A, Erlen J. Exemplars of mixed methods data combination and analysis. Nurs. Res. 2006; 55 (2S): S43-S49.
6. Johnson RB, Onwuegbuzie AJ, Turner LA. Toward a definition of mixed methods research. J. Mix. Methods Res. 2007; 1: 112-133.
7. Kessler R, Andrews G, Colpe LJ etal. Short screening scales to monitor population prevalences and trends in non-specific psychological distress. Psychol. Med. 2002; 32: 959-976.
8. Liehr P, Smith MJ. Middle range theory: spinning research and practice to create knowledge for the new millennium. Adv. Nurs. Sci. 1999; 21: 81-91.
9. McConney A, Rudd A, Ayres R. Getting to the bottom line: a method for synthesising findings within mixed-method program evaluations. Am. J. Eval. 2002; 23: 121-140.
10. Pawson R. Evidence based policy: the promise of "realist synthesis". Evaluation 2002; 8: 340-358.
11. Pawson R, Tilley N. Realistic Evaluation. London: Sage, 1997.
12. Pawson R, Tilley N. Realistic evaluation bloodlines. Am. J. Eval. 2001; 22: 317-324.
13. Roberts D. Working models for practice. In: Regal S, Roberts D (eds). Mental Health Liaison; A Handbook for Nurses and Health Professionals. Edinburgh: Bailliere Tindall, 2002; 23-42.
14. Schwarzer R, Jerusalem M. Generalized self-efficacy scale. In: Weinman J, Wright S, Johnston M (eds). Measures in Health Psychology: A User's Portfolio. Causal and Control Beliefs. Windsor: NFER-NELSON, 1995; 35-37.
15. Wand T, White K. Exploring the scope of the emergency department mental health nurse practitioner role. Int. J. Ment. Health Nurs. 2007; 16: 403-412.
16. Wand T, White K, Patching J. Refining the model for an emergency department based mental health nurse practitioner outpatient service. Nurs. Inq. 2008; 15: 231-241.
17. Wand T, White K, Patching J. Applying a realist(ic) framework to the evaluation of a new model of emergency department based mental health nursing practice. Nurs. Inq. 2010; 17: 231-239.
18. Wilson V, McCormack B. Critical realism as emancipatory action: the case for realistic evaluation in practice development. Nurs. Philos. 2006; 7: 45-57.
19. Woolley CM. Meeting the mixed methods challenge of integration in a sociological study of structure and agency. J. Mix. Methods Res. 2009; 3: 7-25.