ReviewNursing open2024
Conducting mixed methods research with women in a forensic mental health setting: A reflexive account from a nurse as researcher.
Review in Nursing open, 2024. 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.
- Evaluation of the impact of patient and public involvement on doctoral students in palliative dementia care research.Research involvement and engagement · 2025Article
- Conducting mixed methods research with women in a forensic mental health setting: A reflexive account from a nurse as researcher.Nursing open · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsTo describe a reflexive account of a mental health nurse as researcher undertaking a mixed methods study as part of a doctoral degree, with women in a secure forensic hospital.
designA discursive paper that draws upon the primary author's experience of dual roles as a mental health nurse and a novice researcher, and relevant literature pertaining to positionality and reflexivity in the context of conducting mixed methods research.
methodsA mixed methods study was conducted within a secure forensic hospital in Australia, to identify factors associated with the frequency and duration of seclusion for women and, to explore their experiences of seclusion. Notes and a reflective diary were used to demonstrate the reflexive approach and strategies used throughout the study design and data collection stages of the research.
resultsWomen in the secure forensic hospital setting often have complex histories and experiences and are considered a vulnerable group, which can add additional challenges when undertaking research with this population. As a doctoral student with clinical experience in mental health undertaking research in the forensic hospital setting with women, positionality and the connection with reflexivity requires exploration to understand self and the influence on research. This understanding along with identified strategies to enhance reflexivity, supports the management of the dual nurse as researcher roles to enhance all stages of the research process.
conclusionDoctoral nursing candidates undertaking clinical research in their area of clinical practice and at the location of previous employment, may experience challenges in relation to identity and the dichotomy of roles. Further challenges can be posed when research involves complex populations and/or controversial practices. Support to balance role conflict and maintain reflexivity is critical to understanding the role of self in research and to enhance credibility. IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION AND/OR CLINICAL PRACTICE: Women are a complex, yet minority population in forensic mental health settings, however the numbers of women being admitted to services is increasing. Future research may consider the use of the strategies explored here to enhance the reflexive process, and support future researchers in this field to conduct research that aims to support an often-misheard population to better support health outcomes. PATIENT OR PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT: There was no patient or public contribution to this paper, however the study in which this paper is based on, is grounded in the experience of patients (women).
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.