medigraphic.com

2018, Number 2

<< Back Next >>

Enfermería Universitaria 2018; 15 (2)

Nursing: Normal Research or Revolutionary Research?

Daza LA, Ladino LE

Language: Spanish
References: 37
Page: 184-198
PDF size: 731.12 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Introduction: In Colombia, the nursing doctoral education is a relatively recent process. After a decade of formation, aspects such as the new knowledge input, the evolution of designs and methodologies of research, and the number of doctoral staff formed are still underestimated. Within this context, it is important to inquire on the challenges and barriers related to generation of new nursing knowledge.
Objectives: considering the theoretical constructs derived from Thomas Kuhn’s works to discuss the progress of nursing doctorates in Colombia as an indicator of the discipline development.
Methodology: This is a descriptive and narrative study from a literature review on the process of nursing knowledge improvement in the Colombian context.
Results and Conclusions: The nursing doctorate graduation rate has not increased since 2011; only 6.4% of the doctoral dissertations have a concluding reach; although a positive correlation between the nursing theories and the problems studied by the doctorates was evidenced, the approaches to the meta-paradigms and the nursing visions within each study are not clear. A lack of congruency between Khun’s postulates and the epistemological development of present-day nursing in Colombia was also evidenced. Collaborative trans-disciplinary initiatives are encouraged in order to stimulate the development of research programs which address the needs of the Colombian society.


REFERENCES

  1. Bueno LS, Díaz LP, Mejía ME, et al. Panorama de la formación doctoral en enfermería. Av. Enferm. 2010; 28(2): 134-44.

  2. Ketefian S, Pereira NE, Gutiérrez MG. Nursing Doctoral Education in the Americas. Online J IssuesNurs. 2001; 6(2): 1 pantalla.

  3. Organización Panamericana de la Salud (OPS). Formación doctoral en enfermería en AméricaLatina y el Caribe. Washington: OPS; 2017.

  4. Guerreiro-Vieira da Silva DM, Monticelli M, Brüggemann OM. Questions in debating nursingknowledge production. Texto contexto enferm. 2010; 19(3): 411-12.http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0104-07072010000300001

  5. MEN, Sistema Nacional de Información de la Educación Superior (SNIES). Graduados en programasnacionales de doctorado por área OCDE y NBC, 2006-2015. En: Lucio J, Guevara A, Perea GI,et al. Indicadores de ciencia y tecnología, Colombia 2016. Bogotá: Observatorio Colombiano deCiencia y Tecnología. P.43-4.

  6. Geymonat L. Historia de la Filosofía y la Ciencia. 2a ed. Barcelona: Editorial Crítica; 2006.

  7. Losee J. A Historical Introduction to the Philosophy of Science. 4th ed. London: OUP Oxford; 2001.

  8. Richards S. Filosofía y sociología de la ciencia. 2a ed. México DF: Siglo XXI Editores; 2000.

  9. Kuhn T. La estructura de las revoluciones científicas. 2a ed. México DF: Fondo de Cultura Económica;2004.

  10. Briceño T. El paradigma científico y su fundamento en la obra de Thomas Kuhn. Tiempo y Espacio.2009; 52(29): 285-97.

  11. Cortassa C. Thomas Kuhn: ¿El último de los clásicos o el primer revolucionario? A 50 años de LaEstructura de las Revoluciones Científicas. Rev. iberoam. cienc. tecnol. soc. 2013; 8(22): 91-104.

  12. Bueno LS. Aspectos ontológicos y epistemológicos de las visiones de enfermería inmersas en elquehacer profesional. Cienc. enferm. 2011; 17(1): 37-43.http://dx.doi.org/10.4067/S0717-95532011000100005

  13. Fawcett J. The Metaparadigm of Nursing: Present Status and Future Refinements. Journal of NursingScholarship. 1984; 16(3): 84-7. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1547-5069.1984.tb01393.x

  14. Durán de Villalobos MM. Enfermería: Desarrollo teórico y práctico. Bogotá: Editorial Unibiblos;1998.

  15. Durán de Villalobos MM. Teoría de Enfermería ¿Un camino de herradura? Aquichan. 2007; 7(2):

  16. 161-73.16. Fawcett J, Garity J. Evaluating Research for Evidence-Based Nursing Practice. Philadelphia: FADavis Company; 2009.

  17. Bahramnezhad F, Shiri Mahmoud, Asgari P, et al. A Review of the Nursing Paradigm. Open J Nurs.2015; 5(1): 17-23. http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/ojn.2015.51003

  18. Radder H. Philosophy and History of Science: Beyond the Kuhnian Paradigm. Stud Hist Philos SciPart A. 1997; 28(4): 633-55. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0039-3681(97)00015-0

  19. Guerra C, Capitelli M, Longo S. Chapter 2, The Role of Paradigms in Science: A Historical Perspective.En: L’Abate L. Paradigms in Theory Construction. New York: Springer; 2012. P.19-30.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-0914-4_2

  20. Smith MJ, Liehr PR. Middle Range Theory for Nursing. 3rd ed. New York: Springer PublishingCompany. 2014.

  21. Meleis AI. Measuring progress in Discipline. En: Meleis AI. Theoretical Nursing: Developmentand Progress. 5th ed. Philadelphia: Wolters Kluwer Health/ Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2012.P.427-37.

  22. Brockopp DY, Hastings-Tolsma MT. Fundamentals of Nursing Research. Boston: Jones and BartlettPublisher: 1995. P.12-7.

  23. Watson J. Nursing: The Philosophy and Science of Caring. Colorado: University Press of Colorado;2008. P.243-58.

  24. Andershed B, Ternestedt BM. Involvement of relatives in care of the dying in different care cultures:development of a theoretical understanding. Nurs Sci Q. 1999; 12(1): 45-51.https://doi.org/10.1177/08943189922106404

  25. Jones SB. A caring-based AIDS educational model for pre-adolescents: global health human caringperspective. J Adv Nurs. 1991; 16(5): 591–96.https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.1991.tb01695.x

  26. Reed PG. Demystifying self-transcendence for mental health nursing practice and research. ArchPsychiatr Nurs. 2009; 23(5): 397-400. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apnu.2009.06.006

  27. Devlin WJ, Bokulich A. Kuhn’s Structure of Scientific Revolutions: 50 Years On. Basel: SpringerInternational Publishing; 2015. P.204. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-13383-6

  28. Gómez C, Munar C, Parrado YM, et al. Tres escuelas una historia: formación de enfermeras enla Universidad Nacional de Colombia 1920-1957. Bogotá: Universidad Nacional de Colombia,Facultad de Enfermería; 2011.

  29. Slevin O, Hanucharurnkul S. The substance of doctoral education. En: Ketefian S, McKenna HP.Doctoral Education in Nursing: International perspectives. New York: Routledge, Taylor & FrancisGroup; 2005. P.1-26.

  30. Holden JE. Basic science is not nursing research? If it isn’t, what is? West J Nurs Res. 2009; 31(7):815-17. https://doi.org/10.1177/0193945909340762

  31. Moulines CU. La Ciencia: estructura y desarrollo. Enciclopedia Iberoamericana de Filosofía Vol. 4.Madrid: Editorial Trotta; 2013.

  32. Carper BA. Fundamental patterns of knowing in nursing. ANS Adv Nurs Sci. 1978; 1(1): 13-24.

  33. Chinn PL, Kramer MK. Integrated theory and knowledge development in nursing. 7th ed. Missouri:Elsevier Mosby; 2008.

  34. Cody WK. Critical Theory and Nursing Science: Freedom in Theory and Practice. Nurs Sci Q;1998; 11(2): 44-6. https://doi.org/10.1177/089431849801100202

  35. Malinski VM. Critical Thinking and Nursing Science. Nurs Sci Q. 2001; 14(1): 14.https://doi.org/10.1177/089431840101400105

  36. Häberli R, Bill A, Grossenbacher-Mansury W, et al. Synthesis. En: Thompson JK, Grossenbacher-Mansury W, Häberli R, et al. Transdisciplinarity: Joint Problem Solving among Science, Technology,and Society: An Effective Way for Managing Complexity. Basel: Birkhäuser Basel; 2001.P.6–22. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-0348-8419-8

  37. Kleiber C. What Kind of Science Does our World Need Today and Tomorrow? A New Contractbetween Science and Society. En: Thompson JK, Grossenbacher-Mansury W, Häberli R, et al. Transdisciplinarity:Joint Problem Solving among Science, Technology, and Society: An Effective Wayfor Managing Complexity. Basel: Birkhäuser Basel; 2001. P.47-58.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-0348-8419-8




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com