Oncology nursing society year 2004 research priorities survey

Ann Malone Berger, Donna L. Berry, Kimberly A. Christopher, Amanda L. Greene, Sally Maliski, Karen K. Swenson, Gail Mallory, Danny R Hoyt

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

26 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose/Objectives: To determine the Oncology Nursing Society (ONS) research priorities for 2005-2008 for oncology nursing across the entire scope of cancer care, including prevention, detection, treatment, survivorship, and palliative care. Design: Descriptive, cross-sectional survey. Sample: Stratified into two groups: random sample of general membership (N = 2,205; responses = 287, or 13%) and all ONS active members in the United States with doctoral degrees (N = 627, responses = 144, or 23%); overall response rate was 15%. Methods: The 2000 survey was revised and updated. Postcards were mailed to the original sample (N = 1,605) prior to the launch of the online survey, inviting participation via an online or paper-and-pencil survey. An e-mail announcement of the survey was launched one week later, followed by reminders the following week. Because of low response rates, a second sample (N = 600) was selected and contacted. Main Research Variables: 117 topic questions divided into seven categories. Several items were new or reworded. Findings: The top 20 research priorities included 12 of the top 20 items found in the 2000 survey; 8 topics were new to the top 20. Priority topics were distributed across six of seven categories. When general membership results were compared to the doctoral sample, 10 topics were among the top 20 for both groups. Nine topics were top priorities in the 2000 (researcher) and 2004 (doctorally prepared) surveys. Conclusions: Response rates to the electronic survey were lower than for previous paper-and-pencil surveys, but an adequate response was obtained. Rank order of mean importance ratings was determined by narrow differences in scores. The general membership and doctorally prepared samples showed similarities as well as differences in results. Implications for Nursing: The 2004 survey results will inform the 2005 research agenda and assist the ONS Foundation and other funding organizations in distributing research funds.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)281-290
Number of pages10
JournalOncology nursing forum
Volume32
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 1 2005

Fingerprint

Nursing Societies
Oncology Nursing
Research
Surveys and Questionnaires
Nursing Research
Postal Service
Financial Management
Palliative Care
Nursing
Survival Rate
Cross-Sectional Studies
Research Personnel
Organizations

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Oncology(nursing)

Cite this

Berger, A. M., Berry, D. L., Christopher, K. A., Greene, A. L., Maliski, S., Swenson, K. K., ... Hoyt, D. R. (2005). Oncology nursing society year 2004 research priorities survey. Oncology nursing forum, 32(2), 281-290. https://doi.org/10.1188/05.ONF.281-290

Oncology nursing society year 2004 research priorities survey. / Berger, Ann Malone; Berry, Donna L.; Christopher, Kimberly A.; Greene, Amanda L.; Maliski, Sally; Swenson, Karen K.; Mallory, Gail; Hoyt, Danny R.

In: Oncology nursing forum, Vol. 32, No. 2, 01.12.2005, p. 281-290.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

Berger, AM, Berry, DL, Christopher, KA, Greene, AL, Maliski, S, Swenson, KK, Mallory, G & Hoyt, DR 2005, 'Oncology nursing society year 2004 research priorities survey', Oncology nursing forum, vol. 32, no. 2, pp. 281-290. https://doi.org/10.1188/05.ONF.281-290
Berger AM, Berry DL, Christopher KA, Greene AL, Maliski S, Swenson KK et al. Oncology nursing society year 2004 research priorities survey. Oncology nursing forum. 2005 Dec 1;32(2):281-290. https://doi.org/10.1188/05.ONF.281-290
Berger, Ann Malone ; Berry, Donna L. ; Christopher, Kimberly A. ; Greene, Amanda L. ; Maliski, Sally ; Swenson, Karen K. ; Mallory, Gail ; Hoyt, Danny R. / Oncology nursing society year 2004 research priorities survey. In: Oncology nursing forum. 2005 ; Vol. 32, No. 2. pp. 281-290.
@article{06452b776b0042ad9949bb6af5f713e0,
title = "Oncology nursing society year 2004 research priorities survey",
abstract = "Purpose/Objectives: To determine the Oncology Nursing Society (ONS) research priorities for 2005-2008 for oncology nursing across the entire scope of cancer care, including prevention, detection, treatment, survivorship, and palliative care. Design: Descriptive, cross-sectional survey. Sample: Stratified into two groups: random sample of general membership (N = 2,205; responses = 287, or 13{\%}) and all ONS active members in the United States with doctoral degrees (N = 627, responses = 144, or 23{\%}); overall response rate was 15{\%}. Methods: The 2000 survey was revised and updated. Postcards were mailed to the original sample (N = 1,605) prior to the launch of the online survey, inviting participation via an online or paper-and-pencil survey. An e-mail announcement of the survey was launched one week later, followed by reminders the following week. Because of low response rates, a second sample (N = 600) was selected and contacted. Main Research Variables: 117 topic questions divided into seven categories. Several items were new or reworded. Findings: The top 20 research priorities included 12 of the top 20 items found in the 2000 survey; 8 topics were new to the top 20. Priority topics were distributed across six of seven categories. When general membership results were compared to the doctoral sample, 10 topics were among the top 20 for both groups. Nine topics were top priorities in the 2000 (researcher) and 2004 (doctorally prepared) surveys. Conclusions: Response rates to the electronic survey were lower than for previous paper-and-pencil surveys, but an adequate response was obtained. Rank order of mean importance ratings was determined by narrow differences in scores. The general membership and doctorally prepared samples showed similarities as well as differences in results. Implications for Nursing: The 2004 survey results will inform the 2005 research agenda and assist the ONS Foundation and other funding organizations in distributing research funds.",
author = "Berger, {Ann Malone} and Berry, {Donna L.} and Christopher, {Kimberly A.} and Greene, {Amanda L.} and Sally Maliski and Swenson, {Karen K.} and Gail Mallory and Hoyt, {Danny R}",
year = "2005",
month = "12",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1188/05.ONF.281-290",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "32",
pages = "281--290",
journal = "Oncology Nursing Forum",
issn = "0190-535X",
publisher = "Oncology Nursing Society",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Oncology nursing society year 2004 research priorities survey

AU - Berger, Ann Malone

AU - Berry, Donna L.

AU - Christopher, Kimberly A.

AU - Greene, Amanda L.

AU - Maliski, Sally

AU - Swenson, Karen K.

AU - Mallory, Gail

AU - Hoyt, Danny R

PY - 2005/12/1

Y1 - 2005/12/1

N2 - Purpose/Objectives: To determine the Oncology Nursing Society (ONS) research priorities for 2005-2008 for oncology nursing across the entire scope of cancer care, including prevention, detection, treatment, survivorship, and palliative care. Design: Descriptive, cross-sectional survey. Sample: Stratified into two groups: random sample of general membership (N = 2,205; responses = 287, or 13%) and all ONS active members in the United States with doctoral degrees (N = 627, responses = 144, or 23%); overall response rate was 15%. Methods: The 2000 survey was revised and updated. Postcards were mailed to the original sample (N = 1,605) prior to the launch of the online survey, inviting participation via an online or paper-and-pencil survey. An e-mail announcement of the survey was launched one week later, followed by reminders the following week. Because of low response rates, a second sample (N = 600) was selected and contacted. Main Research Variables: 117 topic questions divided into seven categories. Several items were new or reworded. Findings: The top 20 research priorities included 12 of the top 20 items found in the 2000 survey; 8 topics were new to the top 20. Priority topics were distributed across six of seven categories. When general membership results were compared to the doctoral sample, 10 topics were among the top 20 for both groups. Nine topics were top priorities in the 2000 (researcher) and 2004 (doctorally prepared) surveys. Conclusions: Response rates to the electronic survey were lower than for previous paper-and-pencil surveys, but an adequate response was obtained. Rank order of mean importance ratings was determined by narrow differences in scores. The general membership and doctorally prepared samples showed similarities as well as differences in results. Implications for Nursing: The 2004 survey results will inform the 2005 research agenda and assist the ONS Foundation and other funding organizations in distributing research funds.

AB - Purpose/Objectives: To determine the Oncology Nursing Society (ONS) research priorities for 2005-2008 for oncology nursing across the entire scope of cancer care, including prevention, detection, treatment, survivorship, and palliative care. Design: Descriptive, cross-sectional survey. Sample: Stratified into two groups: random sample of general membership (N = 2,205; responses = 287, or 13%) and all ONS active members in the United States with doctoral degrees (N = 627, responses = 144, or 23%); overall response rate was 15%. Methods: The 2000 survey was revised and updated. Postcards were mailed to the original sample (N = 1,605) prior to the launch of the online survey, inviting participation via an online or paper-and-pencil survey. An e-mail announcement of the survey was launched one week later, followed by reminders the following week. Because of low response rates, a second sample (N = 600) was selected and contacted. Main Research Variables: 117 topic questions divided into seven categories. Several items were new or reworded. Findings: The top 20 research priorities included 12 of the top 20 items found in the 2000 survey; 8 topics were new to the top 20. Priority topics were distributed across six of seven categories. When general membership results were compared to the doctoral sample, 10 topics were among the top 20 for both groups. Nine topics were top priorities in the 2000 (researcher) and 2004 (doctorally prepared) surveys. Conclusions: Response rates to the electronic survey were lower than for previous paper-and-pencil surveys, but an adequate response was obtained. Rank order of mean importance ratings was determined by narrow differences in scores. The general membership and doctorally prepared samples showed similarities as well as differences in results. Implications for Nursing: The 2004 survey results will inform the 2005 research agenda and assist the ONS Foundation and other funding organizations in distributing research funds.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=28844468246&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=28844468246&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1188/05.ONF.281-290

DO - 10.1188/05.ONF.281-290

M3 - Review article

VL - 32

SP - 281

EP - 290

JO - Oncology Nursing Forum

JF - Oncology Nursing Forum

SN - 0190-535X

IS - 2

ER -