Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.

The DOI matches its Crossref record; its reference list is not available.

Using qualitative methods in intervention studies

Sandelowski, Margarete·1996·Research in Nursing & Health

Abstract

The effects of key factors in the nursing practice environment--management style, group cohesion, job stress, organizational job satisfaction, and professional job satisfaction--on staff nurse retention and process aspects of quality of care were examined. Hinshaw and Atwood's (1985) anticipated turnover model was modified and expanded to include relevant antecedent and outcome variables. The four-stage theoretical model was tested using data from 50 nursing units at four acute care hospitals in the southeast. The model explained 49% of the variance in staff nurse retention and 39% of the variance in process aspects of quality of nursing care. Study findings warrant careful consideration in light of recent practice environment changes: experience on the unit and professional job satisfaction were predictors of staff nurse retention; job stress and clinical service were predictors of quality of care. The variable contributing the most to indirect, and in turn, total model effects, was that of management style. These results substantiate the belief that aspects of the practice environment affect staff nurse retention, and most importantly, the quality of care delivered on hospital nursing units.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/(sici)1098-240x(199608)19:4<359::aid-nur9>3.0.co;2-h

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

No citation lists for this paper

No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.

Metadata

Authors
Sandelowski, M.
Venue
Research in Nursing & Health
Published
1996

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Using qualitative methods in intervention studies. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/(sici)1098-240x(199608)19:4
The paper
Sandelowski, M. (1996). Using qualitative methods in intervention studies. Research in Nursing & Health. https://doi.org/10.1002/(sici)1098-240x(199608)19%3A4

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.