Format

Send to

Choose Destination
See comment in PubMed Commons below
J Nurs Adm. 2006 Apr;36(4):211-9.

The slippery slope: differentiating between quality improvement and research.

Author information

1
Nursing Administration, The Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, MD, USA. rnewhou1@jhmi.edu

Abstract

As hospitals strive to create strong work environments for nurses, many use the core requirements for Magnet designation to enhance and build new programs in research and evidence-based practice into patient care and operational processes. The problem is the use of quality improvement projects in these efforts as evidence of a healthy "research" program. This confusion can lead to 3 major consequences: (1) poorly designed and interpreted studies; (2) lack of consideration of subject rights; and (3) Institutional Review Board or other regulatory sanctions for noncompliance with federal, state, and local law and institutional policies. The purpose of this article is to differentiate between research and quality improvement, explore the potential risks of confusing quality improvement with research, and suggest criteria by which to determine the difference.

PMID:
16609344
[Indexed for MEDLINE]
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

0 comments
How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Full text links

    Icon for Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
    Loading ...
    Support Center