A critique of concept analysis
Abstract
I argue that there is no place for concept analysis in the scholarship of modern nursing. Although it may have played a role in the intellectual history of our profession, concept analysis is methodologically weak and philosophically dubious. Furthermore, there is no evidence that it has made a contribution to patient care. Concept analysis looked promising in the turbulent days of the 1980s. Nursing practice was being transformed by the introduction of the nursing process and primary nursing. Many changes were driven by an infusion of intellectual energy from newly formed university departments of nursing. Nursing research began to flourish and nursing theories and models were discussed passionately. We were confident that – within a decade or two – nursing would have its unique knowledge base, the ultimate mark of a true profession. Our knowledge base would be built 'from the ground up'. Concept analysis would help us to describe the key elements of nursing practice and we would explore the relationships between concepts through programmes of empirical research. In time, we would build theories and conceptual models and these would feedback to improve practice in a virtuous circle of professional development. Some elements of this vision have, indeed, flourished. In many countries, nursing education is embedded in universities. Nursing research is vibrant, and nurses have played a leading part in the development of evidence-based practice. Other aspects of the prospectus ha…
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?
There is limited methodological guidance on how to conduct a concept analysis.
“There is limited methodological guidance on how to conduct a concept analysis and recently they have been critiqued for having no impact on practice [39].”
From Systematic review or scoping review? Guidance for authors when choosing between a systematic or scoping review approach (2018) · cites this paper as [39]
Concept analysis has recently been critiqued for having no impact on practice.
“There is limited methodological guidance on how to conduct a concept analysis and recently they have been critiqued for having no impact on practice [39].”
From Systematic review or scoping review? Guidance for authors when choosing between a systematic or scoping review approach (2018) · cites this paper as [39]
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Munn, Z., Peters, M. D. J., Stern, C., Tufanaru, C., McArthur, A., & Aromataris, E. (2018) · BMC Medical Research Methodology · doi:10.1186/s12874-018-0611-x · Cited by 11,385 · see citing works
Munn, Z., Stern, C., Aromataris, E., Lockwood, C., & Jordan, Z. (2018) · BMC Medical Research Methodology · doi:10.1186/s12874-017-0468-4 · Cited by 1,164 · see citing works
- Authors
- Draper, P.
- Affiliations
- University of Hull (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Draper, Peter
- ORCID
- Draper, Peter
- Venue
- Journal of Advanced Nursing
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2014-01-28
- Volume
- 70
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 1207-1208
- ISSN
- 0309-2402 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-2648
- OpenAlex
- W2146505975
- Cited by
- 39
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 6 · 2014: 3
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Advanced Nursing (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Nursing › Issues, ethics and legal aspects › Nursing Diagnosis and Documentation
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Methodologies in Health Research and Practice
- Health Sciences › Nursing › Research and Theory › Nursing education and management
- Keywords
- conceptual analysis, nursing knowledge base, nursing theory, nursing models, nursing research, nursing profession, nursing process, primary nursing, nursing education, evidence-based practice, globalization of knowledge, nursing journals, nursing philosophy, epistemology of nursing, nursing as a discipline
- MeSH terms
- Education, Nursing, Humans, Nursing Care, Research Design, Reproducibility of Results, Nursing Research
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