Clinical trials with complementary therapies.

As interest in complementary and alternative therapies grows, nurses can expect to be asked for advice regarding their use, but there are few clinical studies on which nurses can base their responses. Conducting research with complementary therapies is therefore important for nursing, but there are some pitfalls in doing research with these products, particularly if one is using standard clinical-trials methods. In this article, the authors outline some of those pitfalls based on their experience conducting a clinical trial to examine the effects of elk velvet antler on symptoms of rheumatoid arthritis. They discuss design issues related to justification, method, and ethics and explore some important regulatory issues of which nurses should be aware. Some recommendations are presented to help nurses engaging in such research to avoid problems that could interfere with the smooth conduct of their studies.

Scholarly teaching and scholarship of teaching: noting the difference.

Scholarly teaching and the scholarship of teaching are being discussed more frequently in the nursing education literature, yet a clear distinction between the two is often not made. In this paper we will identify the differences between the two and the role each plays in faculty evaluation. We argue that all faculty members should be scholarly teachers but not all will or should engage in the scholarship of teaching.

The notion of evidence in evidence-based practice by the Nursing Philosophy Working Group.

Questions concerning the nature of evidence in evidence-based practice have kindled debate within nursing and other health care disciplines. Such questions include the ends for which evidence is sought, the form(s) of evidence, and the values underlying evidence-based practice. In this article, some of the issues, contradictions, and tensions implicit in these questions are highlighted. It is imperative that the nursing profession continue to explore the philosophic perspectives that underscore evidence-based practice and their implications for decision making in nursing practice.

The road less traveled: nursing advocacy at the policy level.

A frequent observation made about nursing advocacy at the policy level is its absence-or at least its invisibility. Yet there is a persistent belief that nurses will participate in advocacy at the societal level in matters of health. Although gaps exist in our knowledge about how to advocate at the policy level, the authors suggest that a number of other factors contribute to the disconnect between what nurses are expected to do in terms of policy advocacy and what they actually do. There are two main purposes in this article: to review the epistemological foundations of advocacy in nursing, and to present a discussion of other factors that limit our participation in policy advocacy. The authors discuss challenges within the discipline, in the practice context, and at the interface of the worlds of policy and nursing practice. The article concludes with a discussion of possible strategies for moving forward.