The DOI matches its Crossref record; its reference list is not available.
Using qualitative methods in intervention studies
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
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
In the citing paper
“The sample was also able to provide data that addressed the research problem and the two research questions, supporting the case-oriented analysis that was fundamental to the study [ 55 ].”
From Provision of Assistive Technology for Students with Disabilities in South African Higher Education (2021) · cites this paper as [55]
In the citing paper
“Previous literature also reports significant instances of those without disabilities deciding, designing and implementing what they think is rightful for those with disabilities.”
From Provision of Assistive Technology for Students with Disabilities in South African Higher Education (2021) · cites this paper as [55]
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.