Writing for publication: Sharing your clinical knowledge and skills

Sharing Perioperative Nursing Expertise Through Publication: A Guide for the Novice Author

Perioperative nurses can share their expertise by writing for publication in a peer-reviewed journal. Writing can help perioperative nurses grow their professional careers and advance the science of the perioperative nursing specialty. Despite the value and importance of publishing, perioperative nurses may lack confidence and fear rejection and negative feedback; increasing their knowledge and understanding of the authoring and publishing processes can assuage these fears. This education article describes concepts associated with scholarly publishing for authors and offers strategies to encourage perioperative nurses to share their practice experiences or research via peer-reviewed journals. Key steps associated with the writing and publication process are described. The article also explains the editorial and peer-review processes and provides supportive strategies for authors when a manuscript is not accepted initially.

Expanding capacity for publication in nursing: Experiences from a writing for publication group

Nurses have valuable knowledge and expertise to share. Yet, for a variety of reasons, many nurses do not write for publication. Members in one Sigma Theta Tau International chapter requested information about publishing so a writing for publication program (WPP) was convened. Ten nurses from diverse clinical and academic backgrounds participated. The goal of the WPP was to support a small group of nurses to advance knowledge and develop practical skills through the development of a manuscript with mentorship from doctorally-prepared nurses with publishing experience. The anticipated effect was that participants would share what they learned with colleagues or mentor others to publish in the future. Beginning with informational sessions to lay the foundation for writing and publishing, the WPP included biweekly, two-hour online sessions over a seven-month period whereby individual and group writing with embedded peer and WPP leader feedback occurred. WPP participants gained proficiency in searching online databases, synthesizing published literature, and working as a member of a writing team. The group successfully published a manuscript based on a topic of interest. This current article describes the structured support and mentorship provided during the WPP with recommendations for overcoming publication barriers commonly described in the literature.

Facilitating and Inhibiting Factors of Clinical Knowledge Sharing among Medical Specialists in University Hospitals

Background

Clinical knowledge sharing (CKS) is one of the key points of knowledge management in the field of health and significantly increases the quality of care and patient safety. It also provides the achievement of an efficient system in hospitals and educational and treatment centers involved in clinical processes in order to make the best clinical decisions. The purpose of this research is to identify the factors that facilitate and inhibit CKS among medical specialists in the educational-treatment hospitals in Iran.

Methods

This was an applied qualitative study with the conventional content analysis method conducted in 2022. The data collection tool was a semi-structured interview. The participants were 13 medical specialists and sub-specialists working in educational-treatment hospitals of the country, who were selected by purposeful and snowball sampling. The method of data analysis was based on Graneheim and Lundman's five-step method, which was followed by codes, sub-categories, main categories, and classifications.

Results

After conducting the interviews and assessing their content, finally, 193 codes were extracted, which were identified in two general classification of facilitating and inhibiting factors with 92 and 101 concepts, respectively. Facilitating factors in the three main categories of "education in the context of culture, society and university", "planning and implementation management", and "behavioral-motivational factors" and inhibiting factors in the four main categories of "infrastructural, policy-making and cultural challenges", "technological and scientific infrastructural challenges", "personality-behavioral challenges", and "financial and non-financial motivations" were classified.

Conclusions

The participants of the research pointed out the effective role of CKS in keeping them up-to-date in the use of diagnostic, therapeutic, and even drug prescribing methods. According to their belief, knowledge sharing (KS) in the clinical setting will reduce diagnostic errors and cause the primordial prevention of diseases as well as increase the knowledge and awareness of the society members.

Disparities in scientific research activity between doctors and nurses working in the Peruvian health care system: Analysis of a nationally representative sample

Aim

To evaluate disparities in the frequency of scientific activity between medical doctors and nurses in Peru.

Methods

We carried out a secondary data analysis of the National Health Services Users’ Satisfaction Survey (ENSUSALUD), 2016. This nationally representative survey evaluates doctors and nurses working in clinical settings. We defined scientific activity as i) having published an original article (journal indexed in Web of Science, Scopus or Medline); and ii) having authored an abstract in a national or international conference. We estimated crude and adjusted disparities prevalence ratios (aDPR) and 95% confidence intervals (95%CI).

Results

We included 2025 doctors and 2877 nurses in the analysis; 71% of doctors doctor were male, and 93% of nurses were female (p<0.001). Among doctors, 13.9% had published an article, and 8.4% presented an abstract at a conference in the last two years, while these proportions were 0.6% and 2.5% for nurses, respectively. The adjusted models showed that doctors, when compared to nurses, were approximately 27 times likely to have published a paper (aDPR = 27.86; 95% CI 10.46 to 74.19) and twice as likely to have authored a conference abstract (aDPR = 2.51; 95% CI 1.39 to 4.53).

Conclusions

There are important disparities in scientific activity between doctors and nurses working in clinical settings in Peru. Disparities are more significant for article publication than for authoring in conference abstracts. We suggest public policies that promote research dissemination between health professionals, with emphasis on nurses.

Nurse Author: Who Me? Yes, You!

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Potential nurse authors may find writing a challenge, including managing the publication process from getting started through submission to revision of the work and its acceptance. This special article presents strategies to help inexperienced writers develop and hone skills for journal publication.

POTENTIAL PUBLICATION STRATEGIES

Tips discussed here that may lead to manuscript acceptance include selecting a topic of interest, using motivational self-talk approaches and structuring time to write, choosing coauthors, targeting a journal for submission, writing strong sentences in active voice, developing a structured abstract, using correct citation and reference formats, understanding reviews and resubmitting the manuscript, and keeping momentum to produce continued writing results. Practical writing hints are also suggested for inexperienced writers.

RELEVANCE AND CONCLUSION

These strategies can help guide nurse writers in planning, navigating the system, and finding success as a published author.