Dataset Information

Examining characteristics of descriptive phenomenological nursing studies: A scoping review.

ABSTRACT:

Aim

To evaluate the characteristics and methodology consistency in nursing research with descriptive phenomenological design.

Design

Scoping review methodology.

Data sources

Three electronic databases (CINAHL, Embase, PubMed) were systematically searched for qualitative studies with a descriptive phenomenological design published in nursing journals between January 2021 and December 2021.

Review methods

Quality appraisal of each study was conducted using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme checklist. Data were extracted and presented narratively based on research objective, design justification and consistency, theoretical framework, sampling method and sample size, data collection method, data analysis approach and presentation of findings.

Results

One hundred and three studies were included in the review. Overall, the characteristics of the studies are mostly consistent with Husserl's phenomenology approach in terms of research objectives, the use of other theoretical frameworks, sampling and data collection methods. However, the findings revealed several inconsistencies between research design and data analysis techniques, the lack of design justification and the lack of mention of bracketing.

Conclusions

Apart from the need for more research and standardized guidelines to clarify the various qualitative research methods, future nurse researchers are urged to provide more methodological details when publishing a descriptive phenomenological study so that readers can examine the effectiveness and quality of the method.

SUBMITTER: Shorey S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9320962 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundQuality improvement (QI) is used in nursing homes (NH) to implement and sustain improvements in patient outcomes. Little is known about how QI strategies are used in NHs. This lack of information is a barrier to replicating successful strategies. Guided by the Framework for Implementation Research, the purpose of this study was to map-out the use, evaluation, and reporting of QI strategies in NHs.MethodsThis scoping review was completed to identify reports published between July 2003 through February 2019. Two reviewers screened articles and included those with (1) the term "quality improvement" to describe their methods, or reported use of a QI model (e.g., Six Sigma) or strategy (e.g., process mapping) (2), findings related to impact on service and/or resident outcomes, and (3) two or more NHs included. Reviewers extracted data on study design, setting, population, problem, solution to address problem, QI strategies, and outcomes (implementation, service, and resident). Vote counting and narrative synthesis were used to describe the use of QI strategies, implementation outcomes, and service and/or resident outcomes.ResultsOf 2302 articles identified, the full text of 77 articles reporting on 59 studies were included. Studies focused on 23 clinical problems, most commonly pressure ulcers, falls, and pain. Studies used an average of 6 to 7 QI strategies. The rate that strategies were used varied substantially, e.g., the rate of in-person training (55%) was more than twice the rate of plan-do-study-act cycles (20%). On average, studies assessed two implementation outcomes; the rate these outcomes were used varied widely, with 37% reporting on staff perceptions (e.g., feasibility) of solutions or QI strategies vs. 8% reporting on fidelity and sustainment. Most studies (n = 49) reported service outcomes and over half (n = 34) reported resident outcomes. In studies with statistical tests of improvement, service outcomes improved more often than resident outcomes.ConclusionsThis study maps-out the scope of published, peer-reviewed studies of QI in NHs. The findings suggest preliminary guidance for future studies designed to promote the replication and synthesis of promising solutions. The findings also suggest strategies to refine procedures for more effective improvement work in NHs.

Project description:IntroductionA large portion of published evidence syntheses (ES) do not conform to established standards. There is a growing number of reviews labeled as a "systematized review", but authors do not always identify specific methodological adaptations or specify the biases these may introduce.ObjectiveThe objective of this scoping review is to identify which methodological attributes common to evidence syntheses (ES) are implemented or referenced in published systematized reviews. It also aims to 1) identify and collate, where available, the reasons authors characterize their study as a systematized review 2) determine whether any justifications provided were based on resource constraints or research goals, and 3) describe common characteristics of systematized reviews.Inclusion criteriaAll articles that are titled as a systematized review, attempt a collocation and synthesis of existing literature, and include some methodology for their review process, will be included.Materials and methodsA title search will be conducted for the terms "systematized" or "systematised" in proximity to the term "review" in a selection of scholarly sources that offer broad coverage of literature in many disciplines: Google Scholar, Lens, Web of Science Core Collection (Web of Science platform), Scopus (Elsevier platform), MEDLINE (Ovid platform). Screening and data extraction will be done in duplicate. Screening will be conducted in Covidence. Data extraction will be done in Google sheets. Data extraction elements will include common methodological characteristics relating to various steps of the evidence synthesis process. Descriptive, aggregate statistics, and categorization of reasons for selecting the systematized review type are the primary planned analysis for this review.Data availabilityThis is a registered report protocol. The data collected in this research project will be made available in the Borealis repository (https://borealisdata.ca/) upon finalization of the study.

Project description:Background: This scoping review analyzed research about how music activities may affect participants' health and well-being. Primary outcomes were measures of health (including symptoms and health behaviors) and well-being. Secondary measures included a range of psychosocial processes such as arousal, mood, social connection, physical activation or relaxation, cognitive functions, and identity. Diverse music activities were considered: receptive and intentional music listening; sharing music; instrument playing; group singing; lyrics and rapping; movement and dance; and songwriting, composition, and improvisation. Methods: Nine databases were searched with terms related to the eight music activities and the psychosocial variables of interest. Sixty-three papers met selection criteria, representing 6,975 participants of all ages, nationalities, and contexts. Results: Receptive and intentional music listening were found to reduce pain through changes in physiological arousal in some studies but not others. Shared music listening (e.g., concerts or radio programs) enhanced social connections and mood in older adults and in hospital patients. Music listening and carer singing decreased agitation and improved posture, movement, and well-being of people with dementia. Group singing supported cognitive health and well-being of older adults and those with mental health problems, lung disease, stroke, and dementia through its effects on cognitive functions, mood, and social connections. Playing a musical instrument was associated with improved cognitive health and well-being in school students, older adults, and people with mild brain injuries via effects on motor, cognitive and social processes. Dance and movement with music programs were associated with improved health and well-being in people with dementia, women with postnatal depression, and sedentary women with obesity through various cognitive, physical, and social processes. Rapping, songwriting, and composition helped the well-being of marginalized people through effects on social and cultural inclusion and connection, self-esteem and empowerment. Discussion: Music activities offer a rich and underutilized resource for health and well-being to participants of diverse ages, backgrounds, and settings. The review provides preliminary evidence that particular music activities may be recommended for specific psychosocial purposes and for specific health conditions.