...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Nursing philosophy: an international journal for healthcare professionals >Research report appraisal: How much understanding is enough?
【24h】

Research report appraisal: How much understanding is enough?

机译：研究报告评估：足够的理解就足够了吗？

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

When appraising research papers, how much understanding is enough? More specifically, in deciding whether research results can inform practice, do appraisers need to substantively understand how findings are derived or is it sufficient simply to grasp that suitable analytic techniques were chosen and used by researchers? The degree or depth of understanding that research appraisers need to attain before findings can legitimately/sensibly inform practice is underexplored. In this paper it is argued that, where knowledge/justified beliefs derived from research evidence prompt actions that materially affect patient care, appraisers have an epistemic duty to demand high (maximal) rather than low (minimal) levels of understanding regards finding derivation (i.e. appraisers have a duty to seek a superior epistemic situation). If this argument holds assumptions about appraiser competence/ability and the feasibility of current UK conceptions of evidence based practice are destabilized.
机译：在评估研究论文时，多少理解就足够了？更具体地说，在确定研究结果是否可以为实践提供依据时，评估人员是否需要实质性地理解研究结果的来源，或者仅是简单地掌握研究人员选择并使用了合适的分析技术就足够了吗？研究评估人员在发现能够合理/合理地告知实践之前需要达到的理解程度或深度尚待探讨。本文认为，当从研究证据中得出的知识/合理的信念促使采取实质性影响患者护理的行动时，评估人员有认识论上的责任，要求对发现推导（即最大（最大）而不是最低（最小））的理解。鉴定人有责任寻求更好的认知情况。如果这一论点持有关于评估师能力/能力的假设，那么当前英国基于证据的实践概念的可行性就不稳定。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号