An empirical study on evaluation indexes of scientific research achievements in nursing

The 12 core periodicals of nursing reported in the Chinese Science and Technology Journal Citation Report (Core Edition) in 2015 were used as the objects of this study. The results of funded clinical nursing studies in the period 2012–2016 were searched, and 150 scientific studies were randomly selected for a survey of the authors. The inclusion criteria were as follows: (1) availability of accurate contact information; (2) informed consent provided by the authors and willingness to participate in the survey; and (3) completion of the study by each author.

Regarding the project-level perspectives of the clinical nursing studies, five studies were at the national level (4.10%), 46 were at the provincial level (37.70%), 34 were at the municipal level (27.87%), and 37 were at the hospital or university level (30.33%). From the perspective of the type of the clinical nursing studies, 19 studies were fundamental and theoretical studies (15.57%), 11 studies were in the category of soft science (9.02%), and 92 studies were in the category of application of technology (75.41%). Regarding the primary research institutes of the studies, 100 studies were conducted at medical institutions (81.97%), 15 at colleges and universities (12.30%), and seven at other institutes (5.74%). Among the 122 clinical nursing studies, 98 were independent projects (80.33%), and 24 were collaborative projects (19.67%). The 122 clinical nursing studies included 39 originally innovative studies (31.97%) and 83 partially innovative studies (68.03%), among which 37 were award-winning studies (30.33%).

Of the 122 clinical nursing research studies, the authors of 63 (51.64%) studies had received training for the application and transformation of the research results; the authors of 101 (82.79%) studies worked at hospitals, and the authors of 21 (17.21%) studies worked at colleges or universities.

The distribution of the topics in the 122 clinical nursing studies were as follows: 45 in specialist nursing technology (36.89%), 16 in new nursing technology (13.11%), 10 in psychological nursing (8.20%), 10 in rehabilitation care (8.20%), 10 in Chinese medicine nursing (8.20%), 10 in quality of life and personal management of patients (8.20%), nine in clinical nursing theory (7.38%), six in health education (4.92%), three in diet and nutrition (2.46%), and three in extended care (2.46%).

Among the results of the 122 clinical nursing studies, 41 were in stable applications, 45 were applied in a small range with a small batch, 15 were in clinical trials, and 21 had not been applied in clinical trials. The scope of application was mostly limited to the author’s own department and hospital.

The scores of various dimensions in the evaluation of the clinical nursing studies are shown in Table 1.

Table 1

Scores of the various dimensions in the evaluation of the clinical nursing studies

The goal of nursing studies is to identify nursing problems that need to be investigated in practice. These studies systematically investigate or evaluate nursing problems using scientific methods, and the results should directly or indirectly benefit the nursing practice to improve nursing work and enhance the quality of nursing care.8 Transformation of the results of nursing studies is an important part of the development of nursing, as this process can promote nursing studies, improve nursing practice, and scientifically provide quality care for patients.9 Therefore, this study investigated the results of clinical nursing studies. Among the clinical nursing studies included in our survey, the results of 101 studies had been promoted in applications (82.79%), but the scope of the applications was mostly limited to the authors’ own department and hospital, with no large-scale promotion of applications. Squires et al.10 systematically analyzed 55 papers on the application of nursing research results, among which 38 papers showed that the utilization of the nursing research results was moderate; however, the authors of that analysis also believed that this result was too optimistic. The clinical nursing studies in this survey included 37 award-winning studies, among which 30 studies were promoted in a wider range of applications by the authors after receiving their award, indicating that the science and technology award enhanced the effectiveness of the research results and accelerated their transformation and application.11 Thus, science and technology awards and funds for promotion of the application of a study’s findings can improve the scientific research conditions of the care providers, with the ultimate result of promoting excellent clinical nursing research results over a wider range, ideally not limited to the authors’ own department and hospital, in addition to fostering the role of the clinical nursing research results in clinical guidance, promoting the use of scientific approaches in decision-making in clinical care, and ensuring the safety and effectiveness of the nursing services. According to our results, the scores of the studies with applied results were higher than those of studies with unapplied results, and the difference was statistically significant (P < 0.05), indicating that high-level and high-quality nursing results were rigorous in their scientific design, with strong practicality and feasibility, as well as high academic and application value, as shown in Table 2.

From the study-level perspective, the overall scores of studies at the provincial level were higher than those at the hospital level, and the difference was statistically significant (P < 0.05). The scores of the national-level projects were also higher than those of studies at the municipal and hospital levels, and the scores of the provincial-level projects were higher than those of studies at the hospital level. Moreover, the scores of the studies describing original innovations were higher than those of studies describing partial innovations, and the differences were statistically significant (P < 0.05), as shown in Tables 3 and 4. These findings may be related to the relatively strict review system for national and provincial projects, with strict requirements in terms of scientific approach, innovation, and technical means of the projects, as well as the personnel composition and the research capabilities of the research team.¹² These findings suggest that in scientific research management, innovation based on scientific research achievements should receive more attention and that various aspects of projects conducted at the municipal and hospital levels should be strictly controlled to focus on the hotspots of current nursing research and the urgent clinical problems that need to be solved, thereby achieving the intended purpose of research in the context of clinical practice.

Considering the value of the research results, the scores of the clinical research studies conducted by authors from hospitals were higher than those of studies conducted by authors from universities, and the difference was statistically significant (P < 0.05), as shown in Table 5. This finding may be related to the fact that the results of studies conducted by authors from hospitals were based on clinical practice. Nurses identified and investigated the problems in clinical work and then applied the results of the scientific research to clinical practice to solve the problems, thereby verifying the studies’ high academic and application value.

The total scores for the level and effectiveness of studies completed by authors who received related training were significantly higher than those for studies completed by authors who received no related training, and the difference was statistically significant (P < 0.05), as shown in Table 6. This finding suggests that learning and training can not only enhance the awareness, among the nursing staff, of the application of study results but can also help them understand current methods, approaches, and related legal policies for the transformation of study results. Additionally, the nursing staff can learn from previous successful experiences and follow the market, thereby promoting the application of nursing research results.

The practical results demonstrated that the established evaluation indexes of nursing research results can reflect the quality of clinical nursing research studies, which were consistent with actual situations and reflected a certain predictive capacity in the application of clinical nursing research results; this suggests that these indicators can scientifically and effectively evaluate clinical nursing research results, laying a certain foundation for improving the quality of the evaluation of nursing research results.

The application of scientific research results is a systematic project. From the proposal of the project to the successful application of the results, there are many intermediate steps and influencing factors, such as the maturity and adaptability of the studies; the funds for research, development, and transformation; the supporting technology of the scientific research results; and the environment, national policies, laws, and regulations influencing the application of the results. Problems in any of these areas will affect the smooth implementation of the application of the results. Our survey results showed that the top three factors influencing the application of scientific studies are funding (22.14%), the management (20.05%), and the result (17.48%). The funding factor is important for the promotion and application of clinical nursing research results, as are the lack of funding for the transformation of the results and the lack of venture capital. Publicity and transformation of the results require strong financial support. Therefore, this finding suggests that investment in the transformation of scientific nursing research results should be increased to accelerate their transformation and application. The management factor includes the weak involvement of management in the transformation of results, imperfect management and incentive mechanisms, and insufficient efforts for the propaganda and promotion of the results. Whether the nursing research results can be applied in clinical practice is closely related to the degree of management support.13 In the future, management should pay more attention to the transformation of clinical nursing research results and should update nursing procedures and related technologies in a timely manner. The extensive and in-depth publicity of award-winning scientific and technological achievements and the winners themselves not only functions to widely disseminate and introduce the scientific and technological achievements, as well as the necessary information, for their application but also serves to praise the deeds and contributions of the institution’s scientific and technical personnel, thus encouraging them to work harder in new scientific and technological studies and to strengthen transformations of their scientific and technological achievements.14 The result factor is an internal factor that restricts a study’s promotion and application, including the lack of maturity of the findings, the lack of corresponding technical support, an unclear marketing orientation, poor adaptability of the results, and the form of the results. Therefore, the care providers should prepare for the promotion and application of the research results at the stage of the project proposal to make the most of the current clinical needs and should design reasonable and feasible research programs and measures, which will allow the nursing research results to better serve clinical practice.

In addition, the individual subjective factor, the market factor, and the policy factor also have certain impacts on the promotion and application of clinical nursing research results. If nurses are not fully aware of the value of scientific research or do not realize that application is the ultimate goal of scientific research,15 the promotion and application of clinical nursing research results will be restricted. In the future, we should strengthen policy support; improve management of scientific research and the evaluation mechanisms for research results; strengthen related training opportunities in scientific research and design, implementation, and achievement transformation; and encourage and support the nursing staff in the transformation of their research results to truly achieve the purpose that scientific research intends to provide for clinical practice.