RWJF Future of Nursing Scholars experience and recommendations: Focus group results at final convening.

BACKGROUND: The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation launched the Future of Nursing Scholars program to support nurses to complete PhDs in 3 years in schools across the United States. PURPOSE: To explore why scholars participated in the program and to articulate challenges and facilitators to successful completion of their doctoral degrees. METHOD: Thirty-one scholars representing 18 different schools participated in focus groups at a convening in January 2022. FINDINGS: Scholars identified that funding and planned length of degree completion were important factors in their choosing the accelerated program. Mentorship, networking, and support were identified as facilitators to program completion with the tight timeline of three years noted as a challenge. DISCUSSION: Accelerated students require adequate resources including access to data, mentoring, and financing to overcome challenges presented by accelerated PhD training programs. Cohort models provide support and clarity of expectations for both students and mentors is critical.

Three-year nursing PhD curricula content among schools participating in the Future of Nursing Scholars Program.

BACKGROUND: The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF) Future of Nursing Scholars program (FNS) supported 45 nursing schools to create or adapt their PhD curricula to facilitate students completing a PhD degree in 3-years. PURPOSE: This analysis characterized the PhD program curricula of 45 schools. Differences in curricula were examined based on school characteristics. METHODS: Data were collected from five cohorts of school FNS applications. Summaries of curricula are provided and differences in curricula between schools were examined. FINDINGS: Most of the PhD programs (73.3%) were at very high research intensive universities. A median of 60 credit hours were needed to complete a 3-year PhD. Most programs (84.0%) required year-round enrollment, oftentimes inclusive of summers, and placed an emphasis on scholars pursuing additional coursework to meet the 3-year timeline. DISCUSSION: Findings highlight common elements of 3-year PhD curricula that can be utilized to inform the development and educational needs of future nurse scientists.

The impact of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Future of Nursing Scholars Program on scholars, schools and nursing science.

BACKGROUND: The Future of Nursing Scholars program prepared a cadre of PhD prepared nurses for long-term careers advancing science and discovery, strengthening nursing education, and leading transformational change in health care. PURPOSE: The purpose of this manuscript was to describe the program's impact on Scholars' outcomes, nursing schools, and perceived impact on nursing science. METHODS: An independent program evaluation was conducted, including interviewing representatives from schools and reviewing Scholars' Curriculum Vitae. FINDINGS: Two hundred one scholars were supported across 45 institutions. To date, 181 scholars graduated within 3.1 years, on average. Most graduates reported holding appointments in academic institutions. School representatives believed the program supported rapid entry into the field, longer research trajectories, and will improve the nursing faculty pipeline. DISCUSSION: The program achieved its goal of developing cohorts of PhD prepared nurses poised for long-term careers. It provided "proof of concept" on high-quality accelerated PhD education for students well matched with mentors, and elevated the national conversation on PhD education.

Three-Year Nursing PhD Model Recommendations from the RWJF Future of Nursing Scholars.

BACKGROUND: In response to the 2011 Future of Nursing report, the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation created the Future of Nursing Scholars (FNS) Program in partnership with select schools of nursing to increase the number of PhD-prepared nurses using a 3-year curriculum. METHOD: A group of scholars and FNS administrative leaders reflect on lessons learned for stakeholders planning to pursue a 3-year PhD model using personal experiences and extant literature. RESULTS: Several factors should be considered prior to engaging in a 3-year PhD timeline, including mentorship, data collection approaches, methodological choices, and the need to balance multiple personal and professional loyalties. Considerations, strategies, and recommendations are provided for schools of nursing, faculty, mentors, and students. CONCLUSION: The recommendations provided add to a growing body of knowledge that will create a foundation for understanding what factors constitute "success" for both PhD programs and students. [J Nurs Educ. 2022;61(1):19-28.].

From vision to action: Next steps in designing PhD programs of the future.

Declines in PhD enrollment, funding and support for PhD students, and the quality and quantity of the nursing research pipeline has fueled the concern about providing high-quality education in research-focused nursing doctoral programs. To address the challenges and opportunities facing research focused PhD education, the University of Pennsylvania School of Nursing convened an invitational summit, Re-Envisioning Research-Focused PhD Programs of the Future, of research-intensive institutions. Both as a dissemination strategy and as an effort to engage perspectives from other Schools with PhD programs, we presented a summary of the Penn Summit discussion at the AACN Doctoral Education Conference (AACN Doctoral Conference). Focused discussions at both events further identified opportunities for research focused PhD programs, including recruiting undergraduate students, establishing research-focused partnerships, creating clear evaluation methods. AACN Doctoral conference participants also discussed the need to discuss and identify competencies, common subject areas, and financial resources for PhD students and graduates. This synthesis of discussions, considerations, and challenges affecting research-focused doctoral programs of nursing serve as a basis and catalyst for further discussion and action to ensure PhD research focused programs are preparing successful nurse scientists of the future.

Invitational summit: Re-envisioning research focused PHD programs of the future.

Ten years ago, in response to the growing discussions, a seminal report, The Research-Focused Doctoral Program in Nursing -Pathways to Excellence was endorsed by AACN members. A re-envisioning of PhD programs is urgently needed to ensure the advancement of nursing science and to situate research focused nursing PhD graduates for success - in academia and beyond. To address these issues, the University of Pennsylvania School of Nursing held a summit in October 2019, Re-envisioning Research Focused PhD Programs of the Future, with stakeholders from 41 educational, governmental, professional and philanthropic institutions. Results from a pre-summit poll shaped the Summit agenda, which consisted of panels and roundtables. Prior to and throughout the Summit, attendees identified and discussed challenges facing research intensive nursing PhD programs, emerging innovations within programs, and suggested changes to re-envision the future training of nurse scientists. These changes include better preparing PhD program graduates to bridge the research and practice divide, redesign funding and support for accelerated PhD students, and to reconceptualize outcome measures and evaluations of graduates. A synthesis of roundtable discussions will be used to frame other manuscripts in this issue as well as to prepare a roadmap for next steps.

Epidemics from the Perspective of Professional Nursing: Beyond Germs, Public Health, and Pot Banging.

In his classic article, Charles Rosenberg brilliantly sets up epidemics as social phenomena of three interrelated stages-progressive revelation, develop ment of an explanatory framework to manage randomness, and negotiation of public response. This framework, although written almost thirty years ago, still resonates. Even as we have experienced different kinds of infectious epidemics over the last century (Ebola, AIDS), his stages still help us understand how society constructs the meaning of epidemics and manages policies, structures, and postepidemic explanations. Whether Rosenberg's three stages actually help frame the meaning of an epidemic for individual patients and professional care providers, for whom the epidemic is local and personal, is the subject of this essay, with an emphasis on the following question: What is the meaning of an epidemic from a nursing perspective?

A Policy Analysis of Legally Required Supervision of Nurse Practitioners and Other Health Professionals.

The use of legally required supervision occurs across health professionals who provide similar services. Legally required supervision has the potential to disrupt the production of high-quality, cost-efficient, accessible health services across disciplines. This paper examines the effects of nurse practitioner collaborative practice agreements and similar models of health professional regulation, defined as legally required supervision, on the cost and delivery of health services. A policy analysis examines empirical, policy, and law literature between two health professionals providing a similar service. Analysis includes literature on dental hygienists, dentists, certified registered nurse anesthetists, midwives, nurse practitioners, physicians, and pharmacists. A framework for legally required supervision across health professionals is presented. Antecedents of legally required supervision include occupational licensure, reimbursement policy, and institutional policy. Legally required supervision inhibits provider entry to practice and the production of health services by supervised providers. The cost of care increases under legally required supervision. Costs are measured by wages for providers and the price of services for patients. This paper and proposed framework summarize the antecedents and consequences of legally required supervision. Discipline-specific antecedents and provider characteristics must be considered when calculating the full effect of legally required supervision on the delivery and cost of health services.

Nursing for the future, from the past: two reports on nursing from the Institute of Medicine.

In 2010, the Institute of Medicine, in association with the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, released a major study of the nursing profession. The Institute of Medicine last published a major, broad-based study of the nursing profession in 1983. This brief historical analysis examines the context and key recommendations for each report and provides concrete examples of outcomes of the 1983 report. We argue that despite similarities in context and recommendations, the two reports differ in target audience and implementation strategies, and that nursing is currently better positioned to use the report as a blueprint to improve patient care, as well as garner outside support, than it was in 1983.