Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42712043›Full record

ArticleNursing philosophy : an international journal for healthcare professionals2026

Questioning the Foundations of Research Methodologies in Nursing: A Reflection Based on Problematology.

Evy Nazon, Jacques-Bernard Gauthier

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nursing philosophy : an international journal for healthcare professionals, 2026. 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

2 authors.

Evy NazonDépartement des sciences infirmières, Université du Québec en Outaouais, Gatineau, Québec, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0638-1241
Jacques-Bernard GauthierUniversité du Québec en Outaouais, Gatineau, Quebec, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Since its expansion in the 1980s, nursing research has aimed to develop knowledge to produce evidence-based results that can help nurses to guide and improve decision-making regarding patient care. Nursing research is based on a rigorous methodology that meets the criteria determined by the scientific method. However, nursing research predominantly adopts approaches such as gap-spotting and problematization that remain centred on existing knowledge about phenomena. Gap-spotting seeks to identify unanswered questions in the literature, whereas problematization challenges the assumptions underlying previous research. Although these approaches differ, neither necessarily directs questioning towards nursing reality itself or towards the questioning through which that reality is apprehended. Beyond gap-spotting and problematization, this reflection is based on problematology, a philosophical approach that consists of questioning reality and reflexively interrogating the questioning through which that reality is approached. It involves questioning when we want to know which questions to ask and how to distinguish them from questions that seem insoluble. Such a stance will allow us to show the limits of ontologization and examine how the prevailing manner of not questioning reality in nursing can hinder the development of new knowledge in nursing. In this regard, this article uses the example of the nurse's role as a sociopolitical agent to provide an overview of the possibilities offered by the use of problematology.

Indexed as

Nursing ResearchResearch DesignCognitive ReflectionHumansPhilosophy, Nursinggap‐spottingnurseproblematizationproblematologysocio‐political agent

Identifiers

PMID42712043
PMCPMC13554822

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.