A Program to Enhance Writing Skills for Advanced Practice Nurses

Collaborative International Nursing Writing Group: A Nonpatriarchal Approach

This paper offers a critical discussion of the evolution and impact of an international nursing writing group, developed to support nursing faculty and academics globally. Amid the challenges posed by the COVID-19 pandemic, the writing group adapted and thrived online with a flattened power structure, and shared influence and acknowledgment of mutual capacity and contribution. The writing group attracted participants from various countries, with international members enriching collaboration, and fostering a global network of nursing scholars. By embracing diverse perspectives and promoting nonpatriarchal approaches to scholarly writing, the International Writing Group became a unique and valuable platform for academic growth and cross-cultural exchange in nursing.

Project to Publication-A Writing Mentorship Program

PURPOSE/AIMS

Evidence is required to inform effective interventions promoting publication among clinical nurses. This study examined the effect of a mentored writing program on clinical nurse perceptions of writerly self-efficacy and publication.

DESIGN

A mixed-methods, pretest-posttest study design with an education intervention was implemented. The Revised for Nursing Practice - Postsecondary Writerly Self-efficacy Scale (RNP-PSWSES) measured perception of writerly self-efficacy before and after intervention. Manuscripts submitted for publication were counted.

METHODS

The purposive, convenience sample included registered nurses with completed research, evidence-based practice, or quality improvement projects. Subjects participated in a 3-month structured mentored writing program and completed the RNP-PSWSES survey before and after program completion. A Wilcoxon signed rank test was performed to determine the significance of difference between the pretest and posttest, and the number of published manuscripts was reported.

RESULTS

The RNP-PSWSES items identified pretest-posttest Cronbach's α (.728, .818). Posttest RNP-PSWSES scores were statistically significantly higher than pretest scores (z = -1.96, P = .050) with a large effect size of r = 0.69. Two manuscripts were accepted for publication, and 1 manuscript was withdrawn after the third request for revisions.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, mentored writing workshops improve nurses' perceptions of writing ability and increase publications. Generalization of findings is limited by small sample size. Clinical nurse specialists are critical to champion writing and publication.

Evaluating Scientific Writing Skill in DNP Program Students

BACKGROUND/PROBLEM

Scientific writing skill development interventions in nursing are widely represented in the literature, but the specific skills required are poorly defined and measured.

APPROACH

This study used a cross-sectional, descriptive design to compare scientific writing skill assessment of doctor of nursing practice students' final project reports using 2 rubrics.

OUTCOMES

Of 13 skills, the strongest were: adherence to a standard structure, paraphrasing, and grammar, punctuation, and style. The weakest were: use of primary sources, concise, nonredundant presentation, and critical appraisal. Overall interrater agreement for the general essay writing rubric was 69.6%, and that for the scientific writing rubric was 82.3%.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to the essay rubric, the scientific writing rubric was more useful for identifying skill strengths and weaknesses and improved interrater consistency.

An Evidence-Based Approach to Increasing Nurses' Publication Rates

BACKGROUND

Writing for publication in peer-reviewed journals is one of the most important types of writing that nurses engage in. It is essential for advancing the nursing profession, health care organizations, and individual nurses. Despite its importance, however, the rate of publication remains very low among nurses. At one large academic medical center, a baseline assessment of dissemination practices found a low publication rate. To address this, an evidence-based writing-for-publication program was designed to support professional dissemination of scholarly work.

METHODS

A 12-week workshop was designed and writers were matched with a mentor. The workshop started with a four-hour kickoff session on the process of getting published, including choosing a journal, querying an editor, drafting a manuscript, and working with coauthors. Participants also began developing an outline for their manuscript. Drafts were due to the mentor every four weeks for editing and feedback. At the end of the 12 weeks a wrap-up session was held for participants to read each other's manuscripts and give peer feedback.

OUTCOMES

As of this writing, five cohorts have completed the program, and 89 nurses participated. Twenty-nine manuscripts were completed and submitted to peer-reviewed journals; of these, 22 (76%) were accepted, four (14%) are still under review, and three (10%) were recommended for submission to a different journal. Among the 89 nurse participants, 84% reported being likely or very likely to write for publication again, and 96% reported improvement in their writing skills.

CONCLUSIONS

Without more nurses acquiring the skills to engage in writing for publication, the body of advancing knowledge that drives clinical decision-making may wane as aging, experienced nurse authors leave the profession. To protect the future of nursing, a continuous commitment to developing nurse authors across all generations is necessary. Nursing leaders and health care organizations must commit to ensuring novice nurse authors are provided with the resources to engage in disseminating knowledge.