ArticleNursing outlook
Establishing good collaborative research practices in the responsible conduct of research in nursing science.
Article in Nursing outlook. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Framing the Multi-Centre Qualitative Research Design as a Novel Methodology for Nursing and Healthcare Research: Reflections and A Methodological Discussion.Journal of advanced nursing · 2025Article
- Strategies for success in a nursing PhD program and beyond.Journal of professional nursing : official journal of the American Association of Colleges of NursingArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTeam science is advocated to speed the pace of scientific discovery, yet the goals of collaborative practice in nursing science and the responsibilities of nurse stakeholders are sparse and inconclusive. The purpose of this study was to examine nurse scientists' views on collaborative research as part of a larger study on standards of scientific conduct.
methodsWeb-based descriptive survey of nurse scientists randomly selected from 50 doctoral graduate programs in the United States.
resultsNearly forty percent of nurse respondents were not able to identify good collaborative practices for the discipline; more than three quarters did not know of any published guidelines available to them. Successful research collaborations were challenged by different expectations of authorship and data ownership, lack of timeliness and communication, poorly defined roles and responsibilities, language barriers, and when they involve junior and senior faculty working together on a project.
conclusionIndividual and organizational standards, practices, and policies for collaborative research needs clarification within the discipline.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.