Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41029431›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2025

The development and validation of the Research for Practice Tool (R4PT) for nursing and midwifery.

Se Ok Ohr, Vicki Parker, Michelle Giles, Sophie Dilworth, Jean Ball, Ashleigh Stuart, Madeleine Hinwood, Maralyn Foureur, Gena Lieschke

Abstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Se Ok OhrNursing and Midwifery Research Centre, Hunter New England Local Health District, Gate Cottage, Building 6, James Fletcher Campus, 72 Watt Street, Newcastle, NSW, 2300, Australia.
Vicki ParkerNursing and Midwifery Research Centre, Hunter New England Local Health District, Gate Cottage, Building 6, James Fletcher Campus, 72 Watt Street, Newcastle, NSW, 2300, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0834-9528
Michelle GilesNursing and Midwifery Research Centre, Hunter New England Local Health District, Gate Cottage, Building 6, James Fletcher Campus, 72 Watt Street, Newcastle, NSW, 2300, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8611-7941
Sophie DilworthNursing and Midwifery Research Centre, Hunter New England Local Health District, Gate Cottage, Building 6, James Fletcher Campus, 72 Watt Street, Newcastle, NSW, 2300, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3023-8074
Jean BallNursing and Midwifery Research Centre, Hunter New England Local Health District, Gate Cottage, Building 6, James Fletcher Campus, 72 Watt Street, Newcastle, NSW, 2300, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5402-6415
Ashleigh StuartHunter Medical Research Institute, 1 Kookaburra Close, New Lambton Heights, NSW, 2305, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0006-5217-4805
Madeleine HinwoodHunter Medical Research Institute, 1 Kookaburra Close, New Lambton Heights, NSW, 2305, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2225-973X
Maralyn FoureurNursing and Midwifery Research Centre, Hunter New England Local Health District, Gate Cottage, Building 6, James Fletcher Campus, 72 Watt Street, Newcastle, NSW, 2300, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0454-0165
Gena LieschkeNursing and Midwifery Research Centre, Hunter New England Local Health District, Gate Cottage, Building 6, James Fletcher Campus, 72 Watt Street, Newcastle, NSW, 2300, Australia. Gena.Lantry@newcastle.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7295-0097

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTools for assessing research capacity and participation for health professionals have been in use for over a decade with little change. Given the evolving research context emphasising integration into clinical practice, it is time to update or develop tools that reflect current research practices. The aim of this study was to develop and validate a questionnaire designed to examine nurses' and midwives' attitudes, capabilities, participation, and perceived impact of practice-based research.

methodsThe Research for Practice Tool (R4PT) was developed using factors and items identified from an extensive literature review and analysis of existing tools. A modified Delphi method was used to confirm the factors and items. The content validity of the R4PT was determined through reviews from four research experts and six nursing and midwifery clinician researchers. The usability and acceptability of the R4PT was conducted by 12 nurses and midwives. The factors and items of the R4PT were assessed by factor analyses of responses from a target population of 8500 nurses and midwives in a Local Health District in NSW, Australia.

resultsA total of 1,430 participants responded to the R4PT (17%). A seven-factor solution was identified in the exploratory factor analysis. Sixty-six out of 73 items each loaded onto a single factor, explaining 71.5% of the variance. The identified factors were research value and culture (1 and 2), research integration and relevance for practice, research translation, research impact, individual research capability and team research capability. The factors were distinct with the inter-factor correlations less than 0.8. Confirmatory factor analysis indicated that all models showed good fit, with non-significant chi-squared tests, CFIs of 1, TLIs > 0.95, RMSEAs of 0 and SRMRs < 0.8. Cronbach's alpha for all factors, except research value and culture 1, showed acceptable consistency (> 0.7).

conclusionsThe R4PT is a valid and reliable means of assessing research participation, aligning with clinical practice and service delivery trends. The culture and value factors (1 and 2) need to be reworked and retested prior to inclusion in subsequent surveys. The R4PT will provide valuable information to inform capacity-building activities, workforce and work practice models that integrate research into practice.

Indexed as

MidwiferyAdultAttitude of Health PersonnelDelphi TechniqueFactor Analysis, StatisticalFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNew South WalesReproducibility of ResultsSurveys and QuestionnairesDelphi studyMidwiferyNursingResearch and developmentResearch capacityResearch impactResearch questionnaire

Identifiers

PMID41029431
PMCPMC12482206

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.