Lorelli Nowell

Thematic Analysis: Striving to Meet the Trustworthiness Criteria

As qualitative research becomes increasingly recognized and valued, it is imperative that it is conducted in a rigorous and methodical manner to yield meaningful and useful results. To be accepted as trustworthy, qualitative researchers must demonstrate that data analysis has been conducted in a precise, consistent, and exhaustive manner through recording, systematizing, and disclosing the methods of analysis with enough detail to enable the reader to determine whether the process is credible. Although there are numerous examples of how to conduct qualitative research, few sophisticated tools are available to researchers for conducting a rigorous and relevant thematic analysis. The purpose of this article is to guide researchers using thematic analysis as a research method. We offer personal insights and practical examples, while exploring issues of rigor and trustworthiness. The process of conducting a thematic analysis is illustrated through the presentation of an auditable decision trail, guiding interpreting and representing textual data. We detail our step-by-step approach to exploring the effectiveness of strategic clinical networks in Alberta, Canada, in our mixed methods case study. This article contributes a purposeful approach to thematic analysis in order to systematize and increase the traceability and verification of the analysis.

Pragmatism and integrated knowledge translation: exploring the compatabilities and tensions

This paper presents a discussion of the role of the philosophy of pragmatism in the integrated knowledge translation approach to research.

Mixed methods systematic review exploring mentorship outcomes in nursing academia

AIMS The aim of this study was to report on a mixed methods systematic review that critically examines the evidence for mentorship in nursing academia. BACKGROUND Nursing education institutions globally have issued calls for mentorship. There is emerging evidence to support the value of mentorship in other disciplines, but the extant state of the evidence in nursing academia is not known. A comprehensive review of the evidence is required. DESIGN A mixed methods systematic review. DATA SOURCES Five databases (MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, ERIC, PsycINFO) were searched using an a priori search strategy from inception to 2 November 2015 to identify quantitative, qualitative and mixed methods studies. Grey literature searches were also conducted in electronic databases (ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, Index to Theses) and mentorship conference proceedings and by hand searching the reference lists of eligible studies. REVIEW METHODS Study quality was assessed prior to inclusion using standardized critical appraisal instruments from the Joanna Briggs Institute. A convergent qualitative synthesis design was used where results from qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods studies were transformed into qualitative findings. Mentorship outcomes were mapped to a theory-informed framework. RESULTS Thirty-four studies were included in this review, from the 3001 records initially retrieved. In general, mentorship had a positive impact on behavioural, career, attitudinal, relational and motivational outcomes; however, the methodological quality of studies was weak. CONCLUSION This review can inform the objectives of mentorship interventions and contribute to a more rigorous approach to studies that assess mentorship outcomes.

Mentorship in nursing academia: a systematic review protocol

BackgroundMentorship is perceived as vital to attracting, training, and retaining nursing faculty members and to maintaining high-quality education programs. While there is emerging evidence to support the value of mentorship in academic medicine, the extant state of the evidence for mentorship in nursing academia has not been established. We describe a protocol for a mixed-methods systematic review to critically appraise the evidence for mentorship in nursing academia.MethodsStudies examining the effectiveness of mentorship interventions with nursing faculty who teach in registered nursing education programs will be included. Mentee, mentor, and nursing education institutional outcomes will be explored. Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed method studies will be eligible for inclusion, without restrictions on publication status, year of publication, or language. We will search electronic databases (for example, MEDLINE, CINAHL, ERIC) and gray literature (for example, conference proceedings, key journals, relevant organizational websites) for relevant citations. Using pilot-tested screening and data extraction forms, two reviewers will independently review the studies in three steps: (1) abstract/title screening, (2) full-text screening of accepted studies, and (3) data extraction of accepted studies. Studies will be aggregated for meta-synthesis (qualitative) and meta-analysis (quantitative), should the data permit.DiscussionThis study is the first systematic review of existing global evidence for mentorship in nursing academia. It will help identify key evidence gaps and inform the development and implementation of mentorship interventions. The mentorship outcomes that result from this review could be used to guide the practice of mentorship to increase positive outcomes for nursing faculty and the students they teach and ultimately effect improvements for the patients they care for. This review will also identify key considerations for future research on mentorship in nursing academia and the enhancement of nursing science.

A literature review of mentorship programs in academic nursing

BACKGROUND Nursing education institutions have issued recurring, global calls for mentorship; however, evidence-based program development guidance is scarce. To date, there are no comprehensive syntheses of current mentorship models, objectives, and program components to inform mentorship program development in nursing academia. The purpose of this review is to identify published articles that (1) described models for mentoring programs for academic nurses, and (2) described the objectives and core components of these programs. METHOD A systematic search of five databases (Medline, CINAHL, Embase, ERIC, and PsycINFO) was conducted to identify articles describing mentorship programs for academic nurses. Program objectives and components were extracted and narratively synthesized to identify important patterns and themes across mentorship programs. RESULTS A total of 34 articles describing 30 mentorship programs were identified. Mentoring models included dyad, peer, group, online, distance, learning partnerships, highly relevant, and constellation mentorship models. Key mentoring program components included: (a) having a program coordinator; (b) orientation to the program; (c) selectively matching dyads; (d) developing clear purpose and goals; (e) frequent communication between mentors and mentees; (f) faculty development workshops; (g) mentee reflective journaling; (h) facilitation of socialization and networking opportunities; and (i) administrative support. CONCLUSIONS In synthesizing the mentorship literature in academic nursing it is apparent that mentorship models and mentorship components look different in every setting with no empirical evidence that one mentorship model is more effective than another. Given the significant resources required to support mentorship innovations, understanding the benefits and shortcomings of various mentorship components can help ensure scarce resources are invested in the most effective mentorship strategies.

Developing future nurse educators through peer mentoring

License. The full terms of the License are available at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. Permissions beyond the scope of the License are administered by Dove Medical Press Limited. Information on how to request permission may be found at: http://www.dovepress.com/permissions.php Nursing: Research and Reviews 2015:5 13–21 Nursing: Research and Reviews Dovepress

Transition in care from paramedics to emergency department nurses: a systematic review protocol

BackgroundEffective and efficient transitions in care between emergency medical services (EMS) practitioners and emergency department (ED) nurses is vital as poor clinical transitions in care may place patients at increased risk for adverse events such as delay in treatment for time sensitive conditions (e.g., myocardial infarction) or worsening of status (e.g., sepsis). Such transitions in care are complex and prone to communication errors primarily caused by misunderstanding related to divergent professional perspectives leading to misunderstandings that are further susceptible to contextual factors and divergent professional lenses. In this systematic review, we aim to examine (1) factors that mitigate or improve transitions in care specifically from EMS practitioners to ED nurses, and (2) effectiveness of interventional strategies that lead to improvements in communication and fewer adverse events.MethodsWe will search electronic databases (DARE, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane, CINAHL, Joanna Briggs Institute EBP; Communication Abstracts); gray literature (gray literature databases, organization websites, querying experts in emergency medicine); and reference lists and conduct forward citation searches of included studies. All English-language primary studies will be eligible for inclusion if the study includes (1) EMS practitioners or ED nurses involved in transitions for arriving EMS patients; and (2) an intervention to improve transitions in care or description of factors that influence transitions in care (barriers/facilitators, perceptions, experiences, quality of information exchange). Two reviewers will independently screen titles/abstracts and full texts for inclusion and methodological quality. We will use narrative and thematic synthesis to integrate and explore relationships within the data. Should the data permit, a meta-analysis will be conducted.DiscussionThis systematic review will help identify factors that influence communication between EMS and ED nurses during transitions in care, and identify interventional strategies that lead to improved communication and decrease in adverse events. The findings can be used to develop an evidence-informed transitions in care tool that ensures efficient transfer of accurate patient information, continuity of care, enhances patient safety, and avoids duplication of services. This review will also identify gaps in the existing literature to inform future research efforts.Trial registrationPROSPERO CRD42017068844

Psychosocial and career outcomes of peer mentorship in medical resident education: a systematic review protocol

BackgroundMany medical residents lack ready access to social and emotional supports that enable them to successfully cope with the challenges associated with medical residency. This absence of support has been shown to lead to high levels of burnout, decreased mental wellbeing, and difficulty mastering professional competencies in this population. While there is emerging evidence that peer mentoring can be an important source of psychosocial and career-related support for many individuals, the extent of the evidence regarding the benefits of peer mentorship in medical residency education has not yet been established. We describe a protocol for a systematic review to assess the effects of peer mentoring on medical residents’ mental wellbeing, social connectedness, and professional competencies.MethodsStudies included in this review will be those that report on peer-mentoring relationships among medical residents. Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed-methods studies will be eligible for inclusion. No date or language limits will be applied. We will search EMBASE, MEDLINE, PsychINFO, Web of Science, Scopus, ERIC, Education Research Complete, and Academic Research Complete databases to identify relevant studies. Two authors will independently assess all abstracts and full-text studies for inclusion and study quality and extract study data in duplicate.DiscussionThis is the first systematic review to explicitly explore the role of peer mentoring in the context of medical residency education. We anticipate that the findings from this review will raise awareness of the benefits and challenges associated with peer-mentoring relationships, further the development and implementation of formal peer-mentoring programs for medical residents, and, through identifying gaps in the existing literature, inform future research efforts.Systematic review registrationThis protocol has not been registered in PROSPERO or any other publicly accessible registry.