Including systematic reviews in PhD programmes and candidatures in nursing - 'Hobson's choice'?

Nurse Education in Practice

Volumn 14, Issue 2, 2014, Pages 102-105

  Olsson, Cecilia ^a   Ringnér, Anders ^b   Borglin, Gunilla ^c,d  

^a KARLSTAD UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

^b UMEÅ UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

^c BLEKINGE INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (Sweden)

^d MALMÖ UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Meta analysis; Meta synthesis; Mixed studies reviews; Nursing; PhD theses; Systematic reviews

Indexed keywords

CURRICULUM; EDUCATION; EVIDENCE BASED NURSING; HUMAN; LITERATURE; META ANALYSIS; META ANALYSIS (TOPIC); META-SYNTHESIS; METHODOLOGY; MIXED STUDIES REVIEWS; NOTE; NURSING; NURSING EDUCATION; NURSING RESEARCH; ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT; PHD THESES; SCANDINAVIA; STANDARD; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW (TOPIC);

META-ANALYSIS; META-SYNTHESIS; MIXED STUDIES REVIEWS; NURSING; PHD THESES; SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS;

CURRICULUM; EDUCATION, NURSING, GRADUATE; EVIDENCE-BASED NURSING; HUMANS; META-ANALYSIS AS TOPIC; NURSING RESEARCH; REVIEW LITERATURE AS TOPIC; SCANDINAVIA;

EID: 84897595016     PISSN: 14715953     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.nepr.2014.01.005     Document Type: Note

References (13)

1. Boote D.N., Beile P. Scholars before researchers: on the centrality of the dissertation literature review in research preparation. Educ. Res. 2005, 34(6):3-15.
2. Chalmers I., Hedges L.V., Cooper H. A brief history of research synthesis. Eval. Health Prof. 2002, 25:12-37.
3. Cleary M., Horsfall J., Hunt G.E. Top tips for PhD thesis examination. Nurse Educ. Today 2012, 32:7-9.
4. Davies R.E., Rolfe G. PhD by publication: a prospective as well as retrospective award?. Nurse Educ. Today 2009, 29:590-594.
5. Griffiths P., Norman I. Science and art in reviewing literature. Int. J. Nurs. Stud. 2005, 42:373-376.
6. Harden A., Thomas J. Methodological issues in combining diverse study types in systematic reviews. Int. J. Soc. Res. Methodol. Theory & Pract. 2005, 8:257-271.
7. Knowles J.M., Gray M.A. The experience of critiquing published research: learning from the student and researcher perspective. Nurse Educ. Pract. 2011, 11:390-394.
8. Pickering C.M., Byrne J. The benefits of publishing systematic quantitative literature reviews for PhD candidates and other early career researchers. High. Educ. Res. Dev. 2013, 10.1080/07294360.2013.841651.
9. Polit D.F., Beck C.T. Nursing Research: Generating and Assessing Evidence for Nursing Practice 2012, Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Philadelphia. 9 ed.
10. Rahm Hallberg I. Moving nursing research forward towards a stronger impact on health care practice. Int. J. Nurs. Stud. 2009, 46:407-412.
11. Richards D.A., Borglin G. Complex interventions and nursing: looking through a new lens at nursing research. Int. J. Nurs. Stud. 2011, 48:531-533.
12. Yarcheski A., Mahon N.E., Yarcheski T.J. A descriptive study of research published in scientific nursing journals from 1985 to 2010. Int. J. Nurs. Stud. 2012, 49:1112-1121.
13. Zimmer L. Qualitative meta-synthesis: a question of dialoguing with texts. J. Adv. Nurs. 2006, 53:311-318.