2018
DOI: 10.1111/jocn.14159
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Fundamental care and knowledge interests: Implications for nursing science

Abstract: In clinical, academic and research environments, nurses should highlight the importance of fundamental care, showcasing the value of practical and emancipatory knowledge. This process could help to improve nursing science's leadership, social visibility and idiosyncrasy.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

0
7
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 34 publications
(60 reference statements)
0
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In their discursive paper, Granero‐Molina et al () provided a theoretical discussion on the application of Habermas's theory of knowledge interests to fundamental care, arguing for a contextual understanding of key concepts that support the connection between fundamental care, knowledge interests and nursing science. Richards, Hilli, Pentecost, Goodwin, and Frost () conducted a systematic review to determine the effects of nursing interventions for patients' nutrition, elimination, mobility and hygiene needs.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In their discursive paper, Granero‐Molina et al () provided a theoretical discussion on the application of Habermas's theory of knowledge interests to fundamental care, arguing for a contextual understanding of key concepts that support the connection between fundamental care, knowledge interests and nursing science. Richards, Hilli, Pentecost, Goodwin, and Frost () conducted a systematic review to determine the effects of nursing interventions for patients' nutrition, elimination, mobility and hygiene needs.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Every single article either explicitly or implicitly identified the problem of a gap or mismatch between experienced nursing phenomena and existing dominant structures of knowledge and/or its generation as the focus of “philosophizing.” A typical example is provided by Granero‐Molina et al (2018, p. 249) who, in problematizing these structures, stated that “empirical‐analytical methodologies, scientific evidence, and standardization processes take precedence. But in a specific illness context, the reality goes beyond what theory can explain, and what is statistically significant is not always clinically relevant.” Other authors argued that existing theories, while certainly helpful, importantly do not generalize to the diverse populations and settings and contexts that nurses care for or in.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Regarding the first phenomenon, long‐term care (Brazil, Maitland, Ploeg, & Denton, ; Deschodt, Zunica, & Wellens, ; Keller, Beck, & Namasivayam, ; McGilton et al, ; Walsh & Yon, ), nursing home settings (Morley et al, ; Simmons et al, ; Walsh & Yon, ), palliative care (Combs, Kluger, & Kutner, ; Hanson & Winzelberg, ; Henoch et al, ; Lunney, ; O'Quinn & Giambra, ; Ritchie & Zulman, ; Schulz, ) and basic/fundamental care (Walsh & Yon, ) are important phenomena that should be studied more closely. With respect to fundamental care, the practical and emancipatory interests are important to direct nursing research and practice (Granero‐Molina et al, ). Moreover, the impact of nursing and organizational models should be one of the research priority areas in long‐term care settings (McGilton et al, ).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%