Skip navigation
  • Home
  • Browse
    • Communities
      & Collections
    • Browse Items by:
    • Publication Date
    • Author
    • Title
    • Subject
    • Department
  • Sign on to:
    • My MacSphere
    • Receive email
      updates
    • Edit Profile


McMaster University Home Page
  1. MacSphere
  2. Open Access Dissertations and Theses Community
  3. Open Access Dissertations and Theses
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/11375/12811
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.advisorCiliska, Donnaen_US
dc.contributor.advisorMaureen Dobbins, Noori Akhtar-Daneshen_US
dc.contributor.authorMastrilli, Lisa Paulaen_US
dc.date.accessioned2014-06-18T17:00:49Z-
dc.date.available2014-06-18T17:00:49Z-
dc.date.created2013-01-04en_US
dc.date.issued2013-04en_US
dc.identifier.otheropendissertations/7666en_US
dc.identifier.other8727en_US
dc.identifier.other3563951en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11375/12811-
dc.description.abstract<p>The purposes of this study are to compare the differences in research utilization among rural and urban nurses working in acute care hospitals and to examine the individual and contextual factors that may be associated with the differences. A quantitative research designed was used to compare the responses of 220 nurses (109 rural and 111 urban) working in a Local Health Integrated Network in South West Ontario, Canada. Data were collected using a modified version of Estabrooks’ (1997) self-report, mail-in, Research Utilization Survey. Results from the data analysis are discussed. Rural and urban nurses reported similar conceptual, instrumental, and persuasive research utilization (RU), with conceptual RU being the most commonly used form. However, rural nurses reported using overall RU significantly less than their urban counterparts did.</p> <p>Rural nurses reported having less access to organizational champions and resources, such as library research journals and computers, than nurses in urban practice had. An analysis of the association between the individual and contextual variables and overall RU indicates that approximately 26% of variance in nurses’ overall RU scores can be predicted from the variance in scores of the following variables: (a) positive RU attitude, (b) organizational relationships supportive of RU, (c) level of competence, and (d) location of nurses. The findings support a multi-dimensional conceptualization of RU and the merits of exploring individual factors as well as organizational and environmental context in future research, theory development, and implementation of strategies to promote RU among nurses.</p>en_US
dc.subjectrural nursesen_US
dc.subjectacute careen_US
dc.subjectresearch utilizationen_US
dc.subjectcomparisonen_US
dc.subjectdescriptive studyen_US
dc.subjectNursingen_US
dc.subjectNursingen_US
dc.titleA COMPARISON OF RESEARCH UTILIZATION AMONG RURAL AND URBAN NURSES WORKING IN ACUTE CARE SETTINGSen_US
dc.typedissertationen_US
dc.contributor.departmentNursingen_US
dc.description.degreeDoctor of Philosophy (PhD)en_US
Appears in Collections:Open Access Dissertations and Theses

Files in This Item:
File SizeFormat 
fulltext.pdf
Open Access
1.16 MBAdobe PDFView/Open
Show simple item record Statistics


Items in MacSphere are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Sherman Centre for Digital Scholarship     McMaster University Libraries
©2022 McMaster University, 1280 Main Street West, Hamilton, Ontario L8S 4L8 | 905-525-9140 | Contact Us | Terms of Use & Privacy Policy | Feedback

Report Accessibility Issue