Addressing Nursing Scholarship: A Framework for Currency and Number of References.

BACKGROUND: Timeliness and number of references in written work is often a topic of controversy. Decisions about choice of references become complex when there is little recent published information or a great deal of important historical work on a topic. PURPOSE: The study aim was to develop a framework to guide authors to determine the number and currency of references to support their writing. METHODS: This study used a descriptive design with three steps: review of journal author information for guidance about reference currency (n = 247); correspondence with journal editors (n = 27); and a survey of nurse educators (n = 44) regarding currency and number of references in written assignments. RESULTS: Findings affirmed that recent literature is vital for nursing scholarship. Numerical guidelines offered were not based on identifiable consensus or rationale. Historical perspectives published over 5 or 10 years earlier are valued, even sometimes required. For a clinical paper, citation of the most current literature is viewed by editors and educators as essential, and may suffice. CONCLUSION: Based on the findings of this study and our search of the literature, we developed three decision making algorithms for searching the literature and selecting references by currency and number.

Quality improvement project to increase screening and referral for biologic therapy for patients with uncontrolled asthma.

BACKGROUND: Asthma is a treatable chronic disease of airway inflammation with varying levels of control and severity. Biological therapy is an effective evidence-based treatment for patients with allergic and eosinophilic phenotypes of asthma who are classified as poorly controlled moderate to severe asthma. Yet, evidence-based treatments are infrequently used to support effective care of poorly controlled moderate and severe asthma. This quality improvement (QI) project aimed to increase the number of patients with uncontrolled moderate to severe asthma at an outpatient asthma center who are screened and referred for biologic therapy when appropriate. METHODS: A guideline-based biologic screening protocol was implemented using plan-do-study-act (PDSA) methodology allowing for a systematic approach for implementation, monitoring and making adjustments. A pre- and post-independent groups comparative design was utilized to evaluate screening and referral data. RESULTS: Screening improved significantly from pre- (n = 30, 23.8%) to post-implementation (n = 17, 70.8%), p < 0.001; phi = .372. Referrals to biologics also improved from 42.4% (n = 28) to 93.3% (n = 14), p < 0.001; phi = .396. Providers reported increased knowledge, confidence, and satisfaction with the asthma screening protocol at post-implementation. CONCLUSIONS: The implementation of an asthma screening protocol for asthma patients in an ambulatory center is an effective way of increasing screening for eligibility for biologic therapy. Adhering to the standard of care based on evidence-based guidelines increased access to biologic therapy with a higher percentage of patients being referred for therapy.

Integrity of Databases for Literature Searches in Nursing: Avoiding Predatory Journals.

The quality of literature used as the foundation to any research or scholarly project is critical. The purpose of this study was to analyze the extent to which predatory nursing journals were included in credible databases, MEDLINE, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), and Scopus, commonly used by nurse scholars when searching for information. Findings indicated that no predatory nursing journals were currently indexed in MEDLINE or CINAHL, and only one journal was in Scopus. Citations to articles published in predatory nursing journals are not likely found in a search using these curated databases but rather through Google or Google Scholar search engines.

Analysis of Citation Patterns and Impact of Predatory Sources in the Nursing Literature.

PURPOSE: This study was undertaken to learn how predatory journal articles were cited in articles published in legitimate (nonpredatory) nursing journals. The extent of citation and citation patterns were studied. DESIGN: A two-phase approach was used. METHODS: In Phase 1, 204 articles published in legitimate nursing journals that cited a predatory publication were randomly selected for analysis from a list of 814 articles with predatory journal citations. In Phase 2, the four predatory journal articles that were cited most frequently were analyzed further to examine their citation patterns. FINDINGS: The majority (n = 148, 72.55%) of the articles that cited a predatory publication were research reports. Most commonly, the predatory article was only cited once (n = 117, 61.58%). Most (n = 158, 82.72%) of the predatory articles, though, were used substantively, that is, to provide a basis for the study or methods, describe the results, or explain the findings. The four articles in Phase 2 generated 38 citations in legitimate journals, published from 2011 to 2019, demonstrating persistence in citation. An evaluation of the quality of these articles was mixed. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study provide an understanding of the use and patterns of citations to predatory articles in legitimate nursing journals. Authors who choose predatory journals as the channel to disseminate their publications devalue the work that publishers, editors, and peer reviewers play in scholarly dissemination. Likewise, those who cite these works are also contributing to the problem of predatory publishing in nursing. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Nurse authors should not publish their work in predatory journals and should avoid citing articles from these journals, which disseminates the content through the scholarly nursing literature.

A bibliometric analysis of articles identified by editors as representing excellence in nursing publication: Replication and extension.

AIMS: To analyse subsequent citations of 91 articles identified by editors as reflecting excellence in nursing literature and in a companion dataset of 82 other articles from the same journals; and to compare the concepts of reach, persistence, and dissemination in these two datasets. DESIGN: A quantitative bibliometric analysis and qualitative thematic analysis were done between February-June 2019. DATA SOURCES: In all, 91 articles nominated by editors comprised the first dataset. A companion dataset was created by selecting articles (N = 82) from the same journals. REVIEW METHODS: Articles were assessed for type, focus, discipline, total number of authors, and geographical location of the first author. Scopus was searched to obtain bibliographic information and subsequent second- and third-generation citations for all indexed articles. RESULTS: For the articles selected by the editors, 76 were indexed and 43 (56.5%) were cited at least once, resulting in 333 citations in the second and third generations. For the companion articles, 38 (of 78) were cited, with 175 subsequent citations. These findings are congruent with the prior study. CONCLUSION: Articles in nursing journals are being read and cited. The concepts of persistence, reach, and dissemination are supported and their use in bibliometric analysis is warranted. IMPACT: This novel research highlights the global and interdisciplinary impact of a unique set of articles representing nursing and nursing specialty areas. All the articles in the virtual journal and companion dataset were from nursing journals, but dissemination was to other disciplines, primarily medicine. Findings from this replication study continue the effort to document the rigour of content in the nursing literature; support its use to inform policy and practice at all levels; and offer evidence of excellence in content to inform nursing curricula.

Citations of articles in predatory nursing journals.

BACKGROUND: Nursing journals from predatory publication outlets may look authentic and seem to be a credible source of information. However, further inspection may reveal otherwise. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to analyze publication and dissemination patterns of articles published in known predatory nursing journals. METHOD: Using Scopus, reference lists were searched for citations from seven identified predatory nursing journals. Bibliographic information and subsequent citation information were then collected and analyzed. FINDINGS: A total of 814 citations of articles published in predatory nursing journals were identified. Further analysis indicated that these articles were cited in 141 nonpredatory nursing journals of various types. DISCUSSION: Predatory nursing journals continue to persist, yet fewer may now be in existence. Education and information may help authors and reviewers identify predatory journals, thereby discouraging submissions to these publications and hesitancy among authors to cite articles published in them.

Avoiding predatory journals: Quick peer review processes too good to be true.

PROBLEM: Nursing is experiencing the growth of predatory journals with questionable peer review processes. These journals publish submissions quickly and do not enhance the authors' reputation and scholarship of nursing. METHODS: A qualitative, descriptive study design examined the legitimacy of the peer-review process described on the websites of predatory nursing journals. Posted review processes (n = 53) were examined for quality indicators related to language use, author control, and transparency. FINDINGS: Of the 53 predatory nursing journals describing a peer-review process, the majority indicated that all submitted content was sent for peer review (n = 34, 64.15%). Most journals did not describe the criteria on which submitted articles would be evaluated ( n = 39, 73.58%). Quality indicators for language included multiple grammatical errors and odd language and phrases ( n = 39, 73.58%). Author control of tracking, revisions, and review of galley proofs were inconsistent in the described peer-review processes. The majority did not provide a way to track a manuscript through the process ( n = 29, 54.72%). Most journals did not explain the types of peer review they conducted ( n = 31, 58.49%). CONCLUSION: Authors can sidestep the trap of publishing in predatory journals by paying attention to the peer review process when selecting a journal for publication.

Long-acting reversible contraception: Assessment of knowledge and interest among college females.

Objective: To implement the Long-Acting Reversible Contraception Quality Improvement (LARC QI) project using evidence-based contraceptive counseling techniques to improve knowledge and intent to use among college females. Participants: The project, conducted from April through September 2017, involved 41 female students, from a 4-year public college in North Carolina. Methods: Students participated in group educational sessions on all methods of birth control with an emphasis on LARC. Surveys were administered to group participants and descriptive statistics were used to determine the difference in knowledge scores and intent to use. Descriptive and qualitative analysis described usage of LARC methods. Results: LARC knowledge scores significantly improved. Intention to use also increased compared to reported actual use. The final chart review demonstrated an increase usage of the subdermal implant, but no change for intrauterine device. Conclusions: The college setting offers a unique opportunity to use evidence-based contraceptive counseling techniques to guide use of LARC.

A bibliometric analysis of 81 articles that represent excellence in nursing publication.

AIM: To analyze publication patterns of 81 articles included in a "virtual journal." BACKGROUND: From May-July 2017, editors submitted articles from their journals representing distinction in nursing research, education, or practice. Brief responses explained their rationale for article selection. This sample embodied a unique exemplar of excellence in nursing publication and warranted further bibliometric analysis, which was undertaken from February to May 2018. DESIGN/METHOD: Using Scopus, each article (N = 81) was searched to obtain bibliographic information and subsequent second and third generation citations. Three concepts guided the analysis: (a) persistence, rate of subsequent citations over time; (b) reach, geographic distribution of subsequent citations; and (c) dissemination, specialty of follow-on citations represented as nursing or another discipline. Patterns amongst the second and third generation of citations were also examined. RESULTS: Of the 81 articles, 43 (53%) were cited at least once, resulting in 721 second generation citations. There was long-term persistence (N = 2094) over the third and fourth generation citations. There was a wide geographic reach, representing 41 states in the United States and 44 countries. Dissemination was broad with citations in the medical literature eclipsing nursing in the third generation. The highest cited articles were all research reports. Patterns of silos and ripple effect were identified. No pattern could be identified for the 31 articles with zero subsequent citations. CONCLUSION: This study revealed the impact of articles perceived as exemplar representations of 80 different nursing journals. Nursing research is being widely read and cited, both in and outside the profession.

Quality of articles published in predatory nursing journals.

BACKGROUND: Predatory journals exist in nursing and lack the safeguards of traditional publishing practices. PURPOSE: To examine the quality of articles published in predatory nursing journals. METHOD: Randomly selected articles (n = 358) were reviewed for structural content and eight quality indicators. FINDINGS: Two-thirds (67.4%) of the articles were published between 2014 and 2016, demonstrating the acceleration of publications in predatory nursing journals. The majority (75.9%) of the articles were research reports. Most followed the IMRAD presentation of a research report but contained errors, or the study was not pertinent to the nursing discipline. CONCLUSIONS: Nursing research published in predatory journals may appear legitimate by conforming to an expected structure. However, a lack of quality is apparent, representing inadequate peer review and editorial processes. Poor quality research erodes the scholarly nursing literature.

Increasing Primary Care Access Close to Home for Residents of Remote Communities in Northern Alberta.

Residents of Canada's rural and remote communities know the challenges associated with accessing consistent healthcare. Alberta Health Services uses telehealth technology to minimize travel for rural and remote residents who require follow-up with specialists, however until recently, telehealth was only used in specialty care. This article describes a pilot project introduced in two remote northern Alberta communities to determine the feasibility and sustainability of using telehealth in the delivery of primary healthcare. Included in the article are descriptions of each phase of the project from seeking stakeholder approval through interpretation of findings and continuation of the project after it was determined successful. Jurisdictions interested in attempting their own telehealth program will be interested in the challenges and successes identified during the process. Although the project was successful, further studies are needed to determine if similar findings could be expected in other communities and populations.

Study of Predatory Open Access Nursing Journals.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to identify predatory journals in nursing, describe their characteristics and editorial standards, and document experiences of authors, peer reviewers, and editors affiliated with these journals. DESIGN: Using two sources that list predatory journals, the research team created a list of nursing journals. In Phase One, the team collected data on characteristics of predatory nursing journals such as types of articles published, article processing charge, and peer review process. In Phase Two, the team surveyed a sample of authors, reviewers, and editors to learn more about their experiences with their affiliated journals. METHODS: Data from the review of predatory nursing journals were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Written comments were summarized and categorized. FINDINGS: There were 140 predatory nursing journals from 75 publishers. Most journals were new, having been inaugurated in the past 1 to 2 years. One important finding was that many journals only published one or two volumes and then either ceased publishing or published fewer issues and articles after the first volume. Journal content varied widely, and some journals published content from dentistry and medicine, as well as nursing. Qualitative findings from the surveys confirmed previously published anecdotal evidence, including authors selecting journals based on spam emails and inability to halt publication of a manuscript, despite authors' requests to do so. CONCLUSIONS: Predatory journals exist in nursing and bring with them many of the "red flags" that have been noted in the literature, including lack of transparency about editorial processes and misleading information promoted on websites. The number of journals is high enough to warrant concern in the discipline about erosion of our scholarly literature. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Nurses rely on the published literature to provide evidence for high-quality, safe care that promotes optimal patient outcomes. Research published in journals that do not adhere to the highest standards of publishing excellence have the potential to compromise nursing scholarship and is an area of concern.