| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1. |
Record Nr. |
UNINA9910793767303321 |
|
|
Autore |
Lipscomb Martin |
|
|
Titolo |
Nursing literature reviews [[electronic resource] ] : a reflection / / Martin Lipscomb |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pubbl/distr/stampa |
|
|
London ; ; New York, New York : , : Routledge, , 2020 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ISBN |
|
1-351-81269-6 |
1-315-21144-0 |
1-351-81270-X |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Descrizione fisica |
|
1 online resource (185 pages) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Disciplina |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Soggetti |
|
Nursing - Research |
Nursing |
Medical Writing |
Evidence-Based Practice |
Evidence-Based Nursing |
Nurses Instruction |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lingua di pubblicazione |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Formato |
Materiale a stampa |
|
|
|
|
|
Livello bibliografico |
Monografia |
|
|
|
|
|
Nota di contenuto |
|
Introductory harrumphing -- Two types of question -- Conceptual muddle: an ordinary search (part I) -- Beliefs and values: an ordinary search (part II) -- Nursing and non-nursing sources: an ordinary search (part III) -- Reviewing quantitative research -- Reviewing qualitative research -- The final curtain -- References -- Index. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sommario/riassunto |
|
Literature reviews are undertaken by students, researchers, clinicians and educationalists – that is, almost all nurses.Despite much excellent work, exploring the assumptions and practices that constitute searching for and reviewing literature has merit, and prompting those who undertake these activities to think critically about what it is that they are doing should be encouraged. Widely adopted approaches to structuring reviews (the "standard model") can detrimentally limit the scope or range of literature that is accessed and appraised. It is further proposed that a lack of professional ambition or confidence invests aspects of the way some nurses engage with the sources that are available to them. Across the book, parochialism is challenged. The |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
crucial roles that values and judgement play in reviews are highlighted. It is argued that humanities and arts texts deserve, potentially, a bigger or more assured place in reviews undertaken by nurses. Difficulties in appraising quantitative and qualitative research reports are identified, and benefits linked with taking a contemplative line through the review process are considered. This book contributes to debates around evidence-based practice and literature reviews more generally. It will appeal to anyone with an interest in professional issues, research, and the philosophy and sociology of nursing. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2. |
Record Nr. |
UNINA9910797750003321 |
|
|
Titolo |
The space science decadal surveys : lessons learned and best practices / / National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (U.S.) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pubbl/distr/stampa |
|
|
Washington, District of Columbia : , : The National Academies Press, , 2015 |
|
©2015 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ISBN |
|
0-309-37738-2 |
0-309-37736-6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Descrizione fisica |
|
1 online resource (140 p.) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Disciplina |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Soggetti |
|
Astronomy - Research - Forecasting |
Astrophysics - Research - Forecasting |
Space sciences - Research - Forecasting |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lingua di pubblicazione |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Formato |
Materiale a stampa |
|
|
|
|
|
Livello bibliografico |
Monografia |
|
|
|
|
|
Note generali |
|
"Committee on Survey of Surveys: Lessons Learned from the Decadal Survey Process : Space Studies Board : Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences"--Cover. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nota di contenuto |
|
FrontMatter; Preface; Contents; Summary; 1 Decadal Surveys: Community Consensus in Science Priorities; 2 The Decadal Survey Process; 3 The Decadal Survey's Recommended Program; 4 Implementing the Decadal Survey; Appendixes; Appendix A: NASA Strategic Goals and Objectives; Appendix B:Implementing the CATE Process; Appendix C: Letter Requesting This Study; Appendix D: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lessons Learned and Best Practices for Decadal Surveys; Appendix E: Committee and Staff Biographies; Appendix F: Acronyms and Abbreviations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sommario/riassunto |
|
The National Research Council has conducted 11 decadal surveys in the Earth and space sciences since 1964 and released the latest four surveys in the past 8 years. The decadal surveys are notable in their ability to sample thoroughly the research interest, aspirations, and needs of a scientific community. Through a rigorous process, a primary survey committee and thematic panels of community members construct a prioritized program of science goals and objectives and define an executable strategy for achieving them. These reports play a critical role in defining the nation's agenda in that science area for the following 10 years, and often beyond. The Space Science Decadal Surveys considers the lessons learned from previous surveys and presents options for possible changes and improvements to the process, including the statement of task, advanced preparation, organization, and execution. This report discusses valuable aspects of decadal surveys that could taken further, as well as some challenges future surveys are likely to face in searching for the richest areas of scientific endeavor, seeking community consensus of where to go next, and planning how to get there. The Space Science Decadal Surveys describes aspects in the decadal survey prioritization process, including balance in the science program and across the discipline; balance between the needs of current researchers and the development of the future workforce; and balance in mission scale - smaller, competed programs versus large strategic missions.-- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |