Opinions on a strategy to promote nurses\' health research contribution in South Africa

This is the second article in a series of three articles on a strategy to promote nurses' health research contribution in South Africa. This article describes a Delphi study that was conducted to explore the panel of experts' opinions on nurses' health research contribution and to develop a strategy to promote this contribution. A qualitative and quantitative, descriptive design was used. A Delphi study consisting of three successive rounds was conducted from January 2005 to February 2006. A panel of experts (round one: n=28; round two: n=31; round three: n=18), selected from multiple health-related and health research-related clusters, participated. Professional nurses in academic/ educational positions were the main participants. Multi-disciplinary team members, other than nurses, at international as well as national level, also made valuable contributions as part of the panel. Data were gathered by circulating a list of open-ended questions (round one) as well as questionnaires (rounds two and three). Analysis was done using open coding and descriptive statistics. Findings were processed and, in an anonymous way, fed back to panellists to re-assess and change if necessary. In this way, outcomes in the various rounds resulted in a move towards consensus in opinions between the panelists. Elements essential to a strategy to improve research done by nurses, could be identified, namely research capacity building, collaboration, dissemination and utilisation of research results, quality of research conducted by nurses, leadership, resources and research priorities. These elements are seen as a framework for a strategy, and this framework was explored further in a subsequent article. Keywords:strategy; contribution; impact; health research; nurses; Delphi technique; research capacity building; collaboration; dissemination and utilisation; research leadership; research priorities; quality of health research Health SA Gesondheid Vol. 12 (4) 2007: pp. 25-3