Raising Money to Support School Nurses and School Nursing Research: NASN's Endowment Fund.

Have you ever wondered how the National Association of School Nurses (NASN) supports school nursing research and clinical practice degree advancement or how they provide opportunities to strengthen advocacy skills? NASN does this work through an endowment fund which provides annual scholarships and grants to members to support their various professional endeavors.

[Obstacles, difficulties, and facilitators in setting up a research project funded by the Hospital Program for Nursing and Paramedical Research : Lessons learned from a mental health research project] / Freins, difficultés et facilitateurs dans la mise en place d'une recherche financée par le Programme hospitalier de recherche infirmière et paramédicale (PHRIP) : retour d'expérience d'un projet de recherche en santé mentale.

Nursing research continues to grow and become self-sustaining. It was in this context that we received funding from the Hospital Program for Nursing and Paramedical Research for our research project on schizophrenia. Schizophrenia is a mental disorder that affects 1% of the general population, and is a crippling disease both cognitively and socially. Cognitive remediation and therapeutic education are nursing practices deemed suitable for the psychosocial rehabilitation of schizophrenia patients. We hypothesized that a therapeutic education program placed upstream of cognitive remediation would have beneficial effects. We planned to include eighty patients aged eighteen to sixty, randomized into two groups, one combining cognitive remediation and therapeutic education, the second using just cognitive remediation. Each patient was assessed using a range of neuropsychological scales. Due to difficulties encountered in including and following up with participants, our statistical results could not be used. We therefore turned our focus to the factors that facilitate and hinder the setting up of a nursing research project. We organized these factors into three areas : those related to the nurse ; those related to the care facility and the organization ; and those related to the research. The results were consistent with the literature and show how important it is to encourage nurses to be more involved in a scientific approach.

Federal funding of nursing research by the National Institutes of Health (NIH): 1993 to 2017.

BACKGROUND: There has been a dramatic increase in the number of doctoral programs (PhD and DNP) that prepare nurse research scientists and advanced practitioners since establishment of the National Institute of Nursing Research (NINR) at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) in 1985. PURPOSE: The purpose of this report is to examine the historical context of federal research funding to schools/colleges of nursing to determine if the NINR/NIH budget is adequate. METHOD: Data were extracted from the NIH RePORT/ER database from 1993 to 2017. Additional data were obtained from the American Association of Colleges of Nursing. A return on investment analysis for four landmark nursing studies is included. FINDINGS: The percent of the NINR budget awarded to schools/colleges of nursing peaked in 2005; since 2011, more funding to schools/colleges of nursing was received from all other NIH institutes combined, compared to NINR. The return on investment for four nursing research studies, ranged from $1:$202 to $1:$1,206, and far exceeds the Standard and Poor's 500 Index (S&P 500) of 10%. DISCUSSION: Federal funding of nursing research is inadequate and a chokepoint relative to the number of doctoral programs. We suggest the NINR budget would need to increase at least fivefold to over $763 million to adequately fund nursing science. The impact of inadequate funding on the discipline is discussed.

NINR funding dedicated to sexual and gender minority health: 1987-2018.

BACKGROUND: Despite multiple federal initiatives and calls to action, nursing literature on the health of sexual and gender minority (SGM) populations remains sparse. Low levels of funding for SGM-focused research may be a factor. PURPOSE: To examine the proportion and focus of National Institute of Nursing Research (NINR)-funded projects that address SGM health, the number and type of publications arising from that funding, and the reach of those publications over time. METHODS: NINR-funded grants focused on SGM research and bibliometrics of resultant publications were identified using multiple search strategies in NIH RePORTER and PubMed and Scopus, respectively. FINDINGS: Since 1987, NINR has funded 25 projects addressing the health of SGM populations. Pre-doctoral fellowship funding resulted in more publications in nursing journals than research grant funding. DISCUSSION: There are clear differences in patterns of funding for fellowships and research grants with corresponding differences in publications and impact on the nursing literature.

National Institute of Health (NIH) funding patterns in Schools of Nursing: Who is funding nursing science research and who is conducting research at Schools of Nursing?

BACKGROUND: Developing the next generation of nurse researchers must be a priority to advance the discipline's science. A comprehensive description of the current federally-funded research is useful for understanding the research enterprise in Schools of Nursing. PURPOSE: To describe the past 5 years of National Institute of Health (NIH) funding patterns in US Schools of Nursing. METHOD: Data were extracted from NIH RePORTER for years 2014-2018. The total number of award types (F, K, R, U, P and T) granted to a School of Nursing in the US was summarized and organized by Institute. Grants were then characterized according to whether the Principal Investigator had a nursing degree (yes or no). Finally, the total funding from each NIH Institute/Center that was awarded to a School of Nursing was assessed. FINDINGS: Nearly 50% of the National Institute of Nursing Research's (NINR) extramural budget is awarded through grants to Schools of Nursing in the US. NINR funds 80% of training grants and >70% of Center grants, which support the education and infrastructure for research, respectively, at Schools of Nursing. Among top ranked research-intensive Schools of Nursing, awards to non-nurse Principal Investigators (PIs) averaged 34.5% across all years. The percentage of NIH funds awarded to non-nurse PIs ranged from 0% at 3 Schools to as high as 97% at 1 School of Nursing. Over the past 5 years, the following Institutes have consistently been the largest funders (total dollars) to Schools of Nursing: NINR, National Institute of Aging, National Institute of Minority and Health Disparities, National Cancer Institute and National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. CONCLUSION: These findings highlight the current funding streams for Schools of Nursing as well as opportunities for expansion. Preparing a cadre of nurse scientists who can generate new knowledge to advance our health care is critical to the success of our profession and to ensuring the health of the people for whom we provide care.

Successful grant applications: Follow the 4 F's.

All nurses have the potential to influence the healthcare industry and the nursing profession through research, but preparing a grant application can be intimidating. This article addresses the process of writing and developing successful grant proposals.

Desafíos y oportunidades de financiación en la Acción Estratégica en Salud 2017-2020 para la investigación en cuidados / Challenges and opportunities in financing the 2017-2010 Strategic Health Strategy for care research

No disponible

Collecting Nursing Research Data 24 Hours a Day: Challenges, Lessons, and Recommendations.

BACKGROUND: Research on many routine nursing interventions requires data collection around the clock each day (24/7). Strategies for implementing and coordinating a study 24/7 are not discussed in the literature, and best practices are needed. OBJECTIVE: To identify strategies incorporated into implementing a nursing intervention trial 24/7, including key lessons learned. METHODS: Strategies to facilitate implementation of a clinical trial of a nursing intervention with patients undergoing mechanical ventilation are shared. Challenges and changes for future studies also are discussed. RESULTS: Adequate planning, including a detailed operations manual, guides study implementation. Staffing is the most challenging and costly part of a study but is essential to a study's success. Other important strategies include communication among the study personnel and with collaborators and direct care staff. An electronic method of recording study-related data also is essential. CONCLUSIONS: A nursing clinical trial that requires interventions on a 24/7 basis can be done with thorough planning, staffing, and continuous quality improvement activities.

Intramural pilot funding and internal grant reviews increase research capacity at a school of nursing.

BACKGROUND: Strategies for increasing research capacity such as internal funding mechanisms and internal peer reviews for grants are essential for schools of nursing. Although these are documented in the literature, their processes and outcomes have not been reported. PURPOSE: The purposes of this study were to describe three protocols for building research capacity at a school of nursing-intramural pilot grants, Specific Objectives and Aims Reviews, and mock reviews-and quantify their outcomes. METHODS: We assessed outcome data on 14 intramural pilot grants and 88 external grant applications from 2012 to 2016. FINDINGS: Pilot grants produced 16 peer-reviewed articles, 33 presentations, and 11 funded grants. For grant applications that underwent any type of internal review, 41.7% (20/48) received funding compared with 20% (8/40) that did not participate, p = .03. Given the resources required to prepare grant applications, internal funding and reviews can enhance return on investment. CONCLUSION: Schools of nursing should consider implementing intramural pilot grants and internal review sessions.

Crowdfunding: an innovative way to fund your project.

Background Getting research funded is extremely difficult, with research councils rejecting more than 70% of grant applications ( Else 2014 ). It is even more difficult if you are a junior researcher who doesn't have a track record of being awarded grant money or leading a research project. Crowdfunding may offer a solution. It is a method of raising funds from members of the public online and can offer an alternative to the more formal methods of research funding. Aim To outline how this model works and provide tips on designing a campaign. Discussion The authors provide an overview of the literature regarding this model, as well as a set of resources for future reference when designing a campaign. Conclusion Crowdfunding can provide small amounts of money for your first project. Implications for practice It is expected that clinicians practice evidence based medicine, and research in health environments is commonplace. Crowdfunding can offer you support in becoming more engaged in research.

How to Engage Funders and Get Money: the 10 Rs You Need to Know.

Tips from a foundation insider for researchers and nurse leaders.

Quantity and Quality of Economic Evaluations in U.S. Nursing Research, 1997-2015: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: The United States has a complex healthcare system that is undergoing substantial reformations. There is a need for high-quality, economic evaluations of nursing practice. An updated review of completed economic evaluations relevant to the field of nursing within the U.S. healthcare system is timely and needed. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to evaluate and describe the quantity and quality of economic evaluations in nursing-relevant research performed in the United States between 1997 and 2015. METHODS: Four databases were searched. Titles, abstracts, and full-text content were reviewed to identify studies that analyzed both costs and outcomes, relevant to nursing, performed in the United States, and used the quality-adjusted life year to measure effectiveness. For included studies, data were extracted from full-text articles using criteria from U.S. Public Health Service's Panel on Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. RESULTS: Twenty-eight studies met the inclusion criteria. Most (n = 25, 89%) were published in the last decade of the analysis, from 2006 to 2015. Assessment of quality, based on selected items from the panel guidelines, found that the evaluations did not consistently use the recommended societal perspective, use multiple resource utilization categories, use constant dollars, discount future costs and outcomes, use a lifetime horizon, or include an indication of uncertainty in results. The only resource utilization category consistently included across studies was healthcare resources. DISCUSSION: Only 28 nursing-related studies meeting the inclusion criteria were identified as meeting robust health economic evaluation methodological criteria, and most did not include all important guideline items. Despite increases in absolute numbers of published studies over the past decade, economic evaluation has been underutilized in U.S. nursing-relevant research in the past two decades.