Symposium 8 Anyone can make a mistake, to mess up completely requires an expert (23)

Symposium lead and chair:
Carol Haigh, Senior Lecturer in Research, School of Nursing, Allerton Building, University of Salford, Salford, United Kingdom c.a.haigh@salford.ac.uk

Symposia focus:

There is no doubt that nursing research has evolved at a tremendous rate in the last 50 years. Nurses today are more aware of the benefits of a research approach to their care and are open to the idea of critical enquiry. However it must be noted that one of the weaknesses inherent in any research aware discipline is that only ‘successful’ research reaches the public domain. This is partly due to the well documented publication bias which means that journals are only interested in publishing research which has a significant point or generates new concepts or knowledge. Thus, making it unlikely that research that runs into problems or which does not necessarily add in a significant way to the body of knowledge will ever be lodged in the public domain. However it is equally rare for experienced researchers to willingly share their research disasters in the wider public domain. This suggests that the research community knowingly or otherwise has a mystique to it that can confuse and deter novice researchers from pursuing a project of their own especially since such dilemmas are rarely, if ever, explored in formal research text books. This symposium is aimed at novice researchers, post graduate and doctoral students and those who are new to nursing research. The objective, via a series of case studies, is to create a supportive and facilitative environment in which to share the experiences of practised researchers. Problems, the pitfalls and the outright research disasters will be examined and retrieval strategies that were implemented will be shared and complemented by the anecdotes of the more experienced researchers in the audience. The symposium will cover three aspects of nursing research, quantitative methods, qualitative methods and practitioner lead, clinically based studies with each element of the symposium informing the following one.

Case study 1 and 2:

Quantitative methods

Carol Haigh, Senior Lectuer in Research. University of Salford, UK

There are a number of pitfalls that can beset the novice quantitative researcher. Some of these can be attributed to the researchers themselves, such as a failure to pilot data collection tools, some can be due to associate support such as poor data entry or inaccurate coding. This problems and issues discussed within this element of the symposium will be drawn from two quantitative studies, one which focused upon the leisure activity of the resident population of a UK sea side town and the other which examined the values and attitudes of student nurses across three UK universities. A number of problems emerged during the life of these studies, particularly around issues such as questionnaire design and piloting and data entry. The reactions and responses of the researcher involved will be shared and the lessons learned will be discussed.

Case Study 3 and 4

Qualitative methods.

Fiona Duncan, Acute Pain Nurse, Victoria Hospital, Blackpool UK Carol Haigh, Senior Lectuer in Research. University of Salford, UK

Case study 3 concerns a study undertaken in an NHS Trust focussing upon the organisation and delivery of acute nursing care. Using Soft Systems Methodology, a substantial part of the study was based upon the outcome of patient and staff focus groups. Case Study 4 outlines the ethical and practical difficulties faced by a researcher who was a practitioner and who was undertaking a clinically focused randomised controlled trial in an NHS Hospital with which she had strong links. Although primarily a randomised controlled trial there was a qualitative element which involved follow up telephone interviews with patients after discharge, the issues that arise with using interviewers who are novices are discussed here and supportive strategies outlined.

Case Study 5

Practitioner/clinical research

Michell Howarth, Lecutere in Nursing, University of Salford, UK Fiona Duncan, Acute Pain Nurse, Victoria Hospital, Blackpool UK

Although the research active practitioner can experience all of the problems previously outlined in the symposium there are also a number of pitfalls which are unexpected, not often emphasised in the literature and which can catch out the unwary. Moving from a methodological to a practical focus, this part of the symposium continues with the consideration of case study 4 and the unexpected challenges faced by clinical researchers are discussed. In the instance of Case study 4 these included ‘mavericks’ in the clinical area who had a sabotaging agenda and unforeseen difficulties with the Information Technology department. Case study 5 explores the difficulties that are attendant upon the negotiation of access to an area and highlights how crucial the interaction between gatekeepers and researchers can be. This case study highlights that obtaining ethical and governance approval does not necessarily ensure the co-operation of the health care professionals who are on the periphery of the research but still in a position of some power.

Conclusions:

The aim of this enitre symposium is two fold. Firstly to reassure novice researchers that, despite the evidence in the public domain even the best planned research can suffer from the unexpected. The second is to share responses and strategies that can only be gained from meeting these set backs and overcoming them.