A scoping review of nurse-led randomised controlled trials.

Eckert, M; Kennedy, K; Neylon, K; Rickard, CM; Keogh, S; Gray, R; Middleton, S; Homer, C; Whitehead, L; Sharplin, G

A scoping review of nurse-led randomised controlled trials.

Eckert, M Kennedy, K Neylon, K Rickard, CM Keogh, S Gray, R Middleton, S Homer, C

Whitehead, L Sharplin, G

Permalink

Publisher:: Wiley
Publication Type:: Journal Article
Citation:: J Clin Nurs, 2023, 32, (17-18), pp. 5550-5561
Issue Date:: 2023-09

Open Access

Copyright Clearance Process

Recently Added
In Progress
Open Access

This item is open access.

Adobe PDF

Download Published versionAdobe PDF (1.11 MB)

View on publisher's site

View statistics

Full metadata record

Field	Value	Language
dc.contributor.author	Eckert, M
dc.contributor.author	Kennedy, K
dc.contributor.author	Neylon, K
dc.contributor.author	Rickard, CM
dc.contributor.author	Keogh, S
dc.contributor.author	Gray, R
dc.contributor.author	Middleton, S
dc.contributor.author	Homer, C https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7454-3011
dc.contributor.author	Whitehead, L
dc.contributor.author	Sharplin, G
dc.date.accessioned	2023-09-04T04:35:43Z
dc.date.available	2023-01-04
dc.date.available	2023-09-04T04:35:43Z
dc.date.issued	2023-09
dc.identifier.citation	J Clin Nurs, 2023, 32, (17-18), pp. 5550-5561
dc.identifier.issn	0962-1067
dc.identifier.issn	1365-2702
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/10453/171888
dc.description.abstract	BACKGROUND: Nurses comprise the largest portion of the healthcare workforce worldwide. However, nurse representation in the leadership of clinical research and research funding is largely unknown. The Australasian Nursing and Midwifery Clinical Trials Network was established to provide a coordinated network, focussed on building research capacity in nursing and midwifery. To support this work, this scoping review of nurse-led randomised controlled trials was conducted to summarise research activity, as well as highlight future research directions, gaps and resources. Midwife-led trials will be reported elsewhere. AIM: To quantify number, type and quality of nurse-led randomised controlled trials registered between 2000-2021. DESIGN: A scoping review of RCTs. DATA SOURCES: Medline, Emcare and Scopus were searched from 2000 to August 2021. ANZCTR, NHMRC, MRFF and HRC (NZ) registries were searched from inception to July 2021. REVIEW METHODS: This review was informed by the JBI scoping review framework using the PRISMA-ScR. RESULTS: Our search yielded 188 nurse-led publications and 279 registered randomised controlled trials. Multiple trials had the same nurse leaders. There were more registrations than publications. Publications were predominantly of high methodological quality; however, there was a reliance on active controls and blinding was low. Trial registrations indicate that universities and hospital/healthcare organisations were the major sources of funding, while publications indicate that Governments and the National Health and Medical Research Council were the main funding bodies. CONCLUSION: A small number of high-quality, large-scale, nationally funded randomised controlled trials were identified, with a larger number of locally funded small trials. There was a disparity between the number of registered trials and those published. Additional infrastructure, funding and career frameworks are needed to enable nurses to design, conduct and publish clinical trials that inform the health system and improve health outcomes. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Research initiated and led by nurses has the potential to improve the health and well-being of individuals and communities, and current nurse-led research is of high methodological quality; however, there were very few nurse-led RCTs, conducted by a small pool of nurse researchers. This gap highlights the need for support in the design, conduct and publishing of nurse-led RCTs. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: This is a scoping review; therefore, patient or public contribution is not applicable.
dc.format	Print-Electronic
dc.language	eng
dc.publisher	Wiley
dc.relation.ispartof	J Clin Nurs
dc.relation.isbasedon	10.1111/jocn.16632
dc.rights	info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.subject	1110 Nursing, 1117 Public Health and Health Services, 1701 Psychology
dc.subject.classification	Nursing
dc.subject.classification	4203 Health services and systems
dc.subject.classification	4205 Nursing
dc.subject.mesh	Pregnancy
dc.subject.mesh	Humans
dc.subject.mesh	Female
dc.subject.mesh	Nurse's Role
dc.subject.mesh	Midwifery
dc.subject.mesh	Hospitals
dc.subject.mesh	Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
dc.subject.mesh	Pregnancy
dc.subject.mesh	Humans
dc.subject.mesh	Female
dc.subject.mesh	Nurse's Role
dc.subject.mesh	Midwifery
dc.subject.mesh	Hospitals
dc.subject.mesh	Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
dc.title	A scoping review of nurse-led randomised controlled trials.
dc.type	Journal Article
utslib.citation.volume	32
utslib.location.activity	England
utslib.for	1110 Nursing
utslib.for	1117 Public Health and Health Services
utslib.for	1701 Psychology
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Health
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Strength - CHSP - Health Services and Practice
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Strength - WHO CC
utslib.copyright.status	open_access	*
dc.date.updated	2023-09-04T04:35:42Z
pubs.issue	17-18
pubs.publication-status	Published
pubs.volume	32
utslib.citation.issue	17-18

Abstract:

BACKGROUND: Nurses comprise the largest portion of the healthcare workforce worldwide. However, nurse representation in the leadership of clinical research and research funding is largely unknown. The Australasian Nursing and Midwifery Clinical Trials Network was established to provide a coordinated network, focussed on building research capacity in nursing and midwifery. To support this work, this scoping review of nurse-led randomised controlled trials was conducted to summarise research activity, as well as highlight future research directions, gaps and resources. Midwife-led trials will be reported elsewhere. AIM: To quantify number, type and quality of nurse-led randomised controlled trials registered between 2000-2021. DESIGN: A scoping review of RCTs. DATA SOURCES: Medline, Emcare and Scopus were searched from 2000 to August 2021. ANZCTR, NHMRC, MRFF and HRC (NZ) registries were searched from inception to July 2021. REVIEW METHODS: This review was informed by the JBI scoping review framework using the PRISMA-ScR. RESULTS: Our search yielded 188 nurse-led publications and 279 registered randomised controlled trials. Multiple trials had the same nurse leaders. There were more registrations than publications. Publications were predominantly of high methodological quality; however, there was a reliance on active controls and blinding was low. Trial registrations indicate that universities and hospital/healthcare organisations were the major sources of funding, while publications indicate that Governments and the National Health and Medical Research Council were the main funding bodies. CONCLUSION: A small number of high-quality, large-scale, nationally funded randomised controlled trials were identified, with a larger number of locally funded small trials. There was a disparity between the number of registered trials and those published. Additional infrastructure, funding and career frameworks are needed to enable nurses to design, conduct and publish clinical trials that inform the health system and improve health outcomes. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Research initiated and led by nurses has the potential to improve the health and well-being of individuals and communities, and current nurse-led research is of high methodological quality; however, there were very few nurse-led RCTs, conducted by a small pool of nurse researchers. This gap highlights the need for support in the design, conduct and publishing of nurse-led RCTs. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: This is a scoping review; therefore, patient or public contribution is not applicable.

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

http://hdl.handle.net/10453/171888