IntroductionPrimary healthcare nurse practitioners (PHCNPs) practice in a wide range of clinical settings and with diverse patient populations. Several systematic reviews have examined outcomes of PHCNP roles. However, there is a lack of consistency in the definitions used for the PHCNP role across the reviews. The identification of indicators sensitive to PHCNP practice from the perspective of patients, providers and the healthcare system will allow researchers, clinicians and decision-makers to understand how these providers contribute to outcomes of care.Methods and analysisA review of systematic reviews is proposed to describe the current state of knowledge about indicators sensitive to PHCNP practice using recognised role definitions. Outcomes of interest include any outcome indicator measuring the effectiveness of PHCNPs. We will limit our search to 2010 onwards to capture the most up-to-date trends. The following electronic databases will be searched: Allied and Complementary Medicine Database, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Cochrane Library Database of Systematic Reviews and Controlled Trials Register, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, EMBASE, Global Health, Health Economics Evaluation Database, Health Evidence, HealthStar, Health Systems Evidence, Joanna Briggs Institute, Medline, PDQ-Evidence, PubMed and Web of Science. The search strategies will be reviewed by an academic librarian. Reference lists of all relevant publications will be reviewed. Grey literature will be searched from 2010 onwards, and will include: CADTH Information Services, CADTH’s Grey Matters tool, OpenGrey, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, ProQuest Dissertation and Theses and WHO. The PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews will be searched to identify registered review protocols. The review protocol was developed using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols recommendations. A narrative synthesis will be used to summarise study findings.Ethics and disseminationNo ethical approval is required for the study. The data used in the study will be abstracted from published systematic reviews. Dissemination strategies will include peer-reviewed publication, conference presentations and presentations to key stakeholders.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020198182.
Aim Nurse practitioners' added value is often mentioned in publications, but there is no consensus on what value is being added, what value is being added to, and in comparison with what can be considered to be an added value. A concept analysis was conducted to clarify the attributes, antecedents and meaning and better understand the Nurse practitioners' added value. Design Rodgers' evolutionary concept analysis. Methods We selected 16 studies from CINAHL, PubMed, Embase and Medline to conduct a thematic analysis, considering the date, location and discipline of publications. Results Nurse practitioners' added value include: skills and competencies, activities performed, positive outcomes, and positive role perceptions, and antecedents and consequences were also identified. Nurse practitioners' added value is context‐dependent and is often understood by comparing it to a context prior to implementation or other professional roles.
Aims: A discussion of the challenges of recruiting participants from harder-to-reach populations for quantitative survey studies and potential avenues for tailored strategies to address these challenges.Design: Discussion paper. Data sources:The search was conducted on August 2, 2021, in the CINAHL and PubMed databases, and in Google scholar. The initial search identified 5880 articles, and the final analysis included 44 articles that met the inclusion criteria. Articles were retained if they addressed methodological challenges or strategies for recruitment and concerned research with harder-to-reach populations. Implications for nursing:This article draws on the literature regarding the challenges of recruiting research participants from harder-to-reach populations and known strategies for overcoming them. These strategies include, for example, establishing a trusting relationship between the researcher and the participant community and gaining in-depth knowledge of the target population. These challenges and strategies for recruiting participants from these populations are discussed specifically in the context of quantitative survey research. Conclusion:Nurse researchers conducting quantitative survey studies with participants from harder-to-reach populations must tailor their recruitment strategies to the target population and, most importantly, be flexible and creative in their recruitment methods. Impact:The article discusses the challenges of recruiting participants from harderto-reach populations and strategies to overcome them in quantitative survey studies.Successful recruitment requires researchers to develop a thorough understanding of the harder-to-reach population, develop partnerships to locate and access potential participants, build trust with the community, tailor their language, minimize participation risk and resource constraints, recognize the cognitive and physical demands required, and be flexible and creative in developing recruitment strategies. This knowledge can enable the inclusion of more people from harder-to-reach populations in survey studies and provide evidence that can inform research and practice to provide healthcare tailored to their needs and ultimately help improve their health and well-being.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.