http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
간호학 지식개발 분류에 근거한 기본간호학회지 논문 특성
송경애(Sohng Kyeong Yae),김종임(Kim Jong Im),임난영(Lim Nan Young),장성옥(Chang Sung Ok),이규은(Lee Kyu Eun),정승교(Chaung Seung Kyo),김경희(Kim Kyung Hee),백훈정(Paik Hoon Jung),박선남(Park Sun Nam),최동원(Choi Dong Won) 기본간호학회 2007 기본간호학회지 Vol.14 No.2
Purpose: This study was conducted to identify the nature the research trends of articles published in the Journal of Korean Academy of Fundamentals of Nursing (JKAFN), Method: Comparison analysis between articles in JKAFN 〈Volume 13, Number 1-3〉 and articles in the Journal of Korean Academy of Nursing 〈Volume 36, Number 1-3, 5-7〉 based on knowledge development classification was used to identify the nature of research trends in JKAFN. Results: Based on comparison with Journal of Korean Academy of Nursing, research trends in JKAFN were dominant; in personal knowledge in the pattern of knowing in nursing, in the desiderative focus in cognitive needs for nursing epistemology, in advancing of various aspects of nursing in the focus of knowledge, and practice domain in the domains for nursing. Conclusion: The major focuses on research trends in JKAFN were nursing practice, actions of nurses in practice and practice guideline applicable in nursing education.
장성옥(Chang, Sung Ok),원종순(Won, Jong Soon),박진희(Park, Jin Hee),이혜순(Lee, Hea Shoon),박형숙(Park, Hyoung Sook),임선영(Lim, Sun Young),송미령(Song, Mi Ryeong),백훈정(Paik, Hoon Jung),김경희(Kim, Kyung Hee),송경애(Sohng, Kyeon 기본간호학회 2014 기본간호학회지 Vol.21 No.4
Purpose: Purpose: This study was undertaken to develop directions for research on nursing practice education and also for standardization of contents of Fundamental Nursing Practice (FNP) by identifying and analyzing the present content and inconsistency in FNP textbooks. Method: Eleven FNP textbooks published between 2007 and 2013 were selected and itemized nursing contents were compared and analyzed. Nursing professors and practicingnurses prioritized contents identified from an actual condition survey based on theoretical reason and clinical guides for each item. Results: Inconsistencies were found for 34 domains with 219 sub items and of them, 21 domains and 84 items needed to be standardized. Number of items that showed consistency between professors and nurses (ICC ≥ .800) was 29 (34.5%) and for complete consistency (ICC=1), 4 (4.8%). Number of items that showed inconsistency between the groups (ICC< .600) was 30 (35.7%) and very low consistency (ICC=0), 10 (11.9%). Conclusion: The results indicate a difference between understood validity of content by professors and by nurses and technical differences among FNP textbooks. Therefore confirmation of the items needing to be standardized and differences in understanding content by professors and by nurses shows a need for standardization of practice education between course and clinical practice. These results provide basic data for developing standardized form of FNP education.