Mixed messages in nursing research: their contribution to the persisting hiatus between evidence and practice

Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
The current emphasis in the United Kingdom on evidence‐based health care requires that medical and non‐medical professionals ensure that their clinical practice is founded on scientifically derived findings rather than on intuition and ritual. To this end, many initiatives have been introduced which are intended to increase both the corpus of available research evidence and the extent to which it informs practice. To date, however, there has been a disappointing shortfall in published research in the paramedical domain, which has been largely attributed to a number of structural and organizational issues. This paper suggests that confusion about what constitutes valid and useful research may be an additional significant contributory factor in the documented research/practice hiatus. Moreover, the emphasis on experimentation and Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs), with the relative marginalization of alternative, more qualitative forms of research may seriously limit the nursing research data‐base because of its inappropriateness for many nursing investigations. It is suggested that a more eclectic approach to evidence‐based care is considered, with more attention being diverted to qualitative methodologies at the funding and dissemination stages. In this way, a comprehensive and balanced overview of relevant information can be obtained which has the potential to influence some of the less quantifiable aspects of care delivery.