A Survey of NAPNAP Members Clinical and Professional Research Priorities
For which topic were research priorities identified?
pediatric nursing practice
In which location was the research priority setting conducted?
North America - USA
Why was it conducted at all?
The National Association of Pediatric Nurse Practitioners (NAPNAP) identified the need to develop a research agenda in its 2005 strategic plan. Facilitating research is a major component of NAPNAP's mission to promote optimal health for all children. Developing NAPNAP's Research Agenda was seen as a critical step in identifying important gaps in evidence for practice and informing the members and others about current and changing priorities.
What was the objective?
to determine NAPNAP members' ranking of research priorities, to describe the top priorities ranked by participants, and to determine if priorities differed by area of practice (primary, acute, or specialty care) or participant age
What was the outcome?
a ranking list of 14 research topics
How long did the research prioritization take?
No information provided.
Which methods were used to identify research priorities?
focus group; survey
How were the priorities for research identified exactly?
Step 1: collecting research questions: via focus groups, participants were asked to identify questions or priority areas where evidence was needed for practice, additionally documents reviewed. Step 2: data processing: thematic analysis. Step 3: survey: the survey section 'Clinical Priorities' contained 54 priority statements and the survey section 'Professional Role Priorities' contained 36 priority statements, participants were asked for their agreement regarding these priorities
Which stakeholders took part?
Members of the national association of pediatric nurse practitioners. Survey: 324 participants.
How were stakeholders recruited?
First, an announcement inviting members to participate in the survey was featured in the September/ October 2007 NAPNAP Newsletter. Second, the day the survey was posted online, all 5368 NAPNAP members who had an e-mail address in 2007 (83% of the total membership) were invited to participate in the survey. The survey was posted online for 15 days in late September 2007.
Were stakeholders actively involved or did they just participate?
Stakeholders were mere participants of the research prioritization process; they were not actively involved in the process.