Evidence for practice: Are we acknowledging the importance of methodology and context?

Journal of Research in Nursing

Volumn 2, Issue 4, 1997, Pages 242-244

  Mulhall, Anne ^c   Alexander, Caroline ^a   May, Andree ^b  

^a Foundation of Nursing Studies   (United Kingdom)

^b BRUNEL UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^c NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 79959189770     PISSN: 17449871     EISSN: 1744988X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/136140969700200402     Document Type: Note

References (19)

1. Department of Health. Research for Health: A research and development strategy for the NHS. London: HMSO, 1991.
2. Department of Health. Research for Health. London: HMSO, 1993.
3. Culyer, A. Supporting Research and Development in the NHS. London: HMSO, 1995.
4. Lacey, A. Facilitating research-based practice by educational intervention. Nurse Education Today 1996; 16: 296-301.
5. Mulhall, A., Le May, A., Alexander, C. Research-based nursing practice-an evaluation of an educational programme. Nurse Education Today. In press, 1988.
6. Parahoo, K. Questionnaires: Use value and limitations. Nurse Researcher 1993; 1: 2, 4-15.
7. While, A. Review: Applying psychometric principles to the development of a training needs analysis questionnaire for use with health visitors, district and practice nurses. NT Research 1996; 1: 6, 455.
8. Hicks, C., Hennessy, D. Applying psychometric principles to the development of a training needs analysis questionnaire for use with health visitors, district and practice nurses. NT Research 1996; 1:6, 442-454.
9. White, E., Brooker, C. Survey methodology and the issue of response rate: The case example of a community mental health nursing census. NT Research 1997; 2:3, 164-174.
10. Pearcey, P.A. Achieving research-based nursing practice. Journal of Advanced Nursing 1995; 22: 33-39.
11. Veeramah, V. A study to identify the attitudes and needs of qualified staff concerning the use of research findings in clinical practice within mental health care settings. Journal of Advanced Nursing 1995; 22: 855-861.
12. Carr-Hill, R. Commentary: Choosing between qualitative and quantitative approaches. NT Research 1997; 2:3, 185-186.
13. Rafferty, A.M., Traynor, M. Quality and quantity in research policy for nursing. NT Research 1997; 2: 16-27.
14. Traynor, M, Rafferty, A.M. The NHSR&D Context for Nursing Research:A working paper London: Centre for Policy in Nursing Research, 1997.
15. Kitson, A. Lessons from the 1996 Research Assessment Exercise. Nurse Researcher 1997; 4: 81-93.
16. Shuldham, C., Hiley, C. Randomised controlled trials in clinical practice: The continuing debate. NT Research 1997; 2:2, 128-134.
17. Cullum, N. Review: Randomised controlled trials in clinical practice: The continuing debate. NT Research 1997; 2:1, 135.
18. NHS Executive. Strategic Framework for the Use of the NHS R&D Levy. London: NHS Executive, 1997.
19. Robinson, J. It's only a questionnaire. ethics in social science research. British Journal of Midwifery 1996; 4: 41-44.