A & E nurses' constructs on the nature of nursing expertise: a repertory grid technique
Abstract
The concept of nursing expertise has been the focus of considerable debate since the early 1980s, yet an agreed definition of the concept and the precise criteria by which it can be evaluated remains elusive. This paper will describe an exploratory study into A & E nurses' constructs of the nature of nursing expertise. Seven first level Accident and Emergency (A & E) nurses were interviewed using Kelly's Repertory Grid Technique. Each was asked to provide examples of nurses with whom they are working or have worked, to match eight given examples designed to represent varying levels of clinical expertise. The informants were asked to consider in what way two of their chosen examples were alike and differed from a third in their clinical practice. A total of 55 bi-polar constructs emerged which were clustered under four main headings. These suggested that A & E nurses perceived expert practice to be characterized by a high level of empirical knowledge, supportive team building, assertive clinical leadership and patient-focused involvement.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
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?
Expert knowledge is very specific to the domain in which the expert practices (context- or content-specific).
“Firstly, the nature of expert knowledge is such that it is very specific to the domain in which the expert practices, that is, it is context-or content-specific (Norman et al 1985, Benner & Tanner 1987, Edwards 1998)”
From The acquisition and exercise of nephrology nursing expertise: a grounded theory study (2006) · cites this paper as Edwards 1998
Cites
A Five-Stage Model of the Mental Activities Involved in Directed Skill Acquisition
Dreyfus, S. E., & Dreyfus, H. L. (1980) · doi:10.21236/ada084551 · Cited by 1,572 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Recognition of expertise: An important concept in the acquisition of nephrology nursing expertise
Bonner, A. (2003) · Nursing & Health Sciences · doi:10.1046/j.1442-2018.2003.00143.x · Cited by 44 · see citing works
The acquisition and exercise of nephrology nursing expertise: a grounded theory study
Bonner, A., & Greenwood, J. (2006) · Journal of Clinical Nursing · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2702.2006.01361.x · Cited by 27 · see citing works
- Authors
- Edwards, B.
- Affiliations
- Bournemouth University (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Edwards, B.
- Venue
- Accident and Emergency Nursing
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 1998-01
- Volume
- 6
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 18-23
- ISSN
- 0965-2302 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2115382376
- Cited by
- 15
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2018: 1 · 2015: 1 · 2012: 1
- FWCI
- 1.61
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Accident and Emergency Nursing (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Nursing › Research and Theory › Nursing education and management
- Health Sciences › Nursing › Leadership and Management › Healthcare Education and Workforce Issues
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Nursing Roles and Practices
- Keywords
- nursing expertise, emergency department nurses, clinical expertise, nurses' perceptions, empirical knowledge, clinical leadership, team building, patient involvement
- MeSH terms
- Attitude of Health Personnel, Clinical Competence, Humans, Job Description, Nursing Staff, Hospital, Surveys and Questionnaires, Nursing Methodology Research, Cluster Analysis, Emergency Nursing, Knowledge, Intuition
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