Concept Analysis: Examining the State of the Science
Abstract
As methods for analyzing concepts have proliferated in nursing, a critical methodological issue has arisen. Analytic techniques for examining conceptual meaning have incorporated varied strategies for advancing the concept under the rubric of concept analysis, concept development, and theory building. The authors argue that this evolution has created methodological confusion. Following a discussion of a conceptualization of concepts and concept-theory-truth linkages, methods of concept analysis are critiqued in terms of the purpose and the nature of the findings produced by analyses using both traditional and emergent methods. The authors argue that concept analysis is a process of strategic examination of the scientific literature that results in an integrated perspective of the state of the science, or what is known about the concept. In contrast, concept advancement refers to techniques that emphasize the synthesis of new or deeper knowledge that is relevant to the discipline. The authors conclude that disentangling concept analysis from techniques for concept advancement is critical to enhancing the utility of concept-based research in nursing.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Unraveling the meaning of patient engagement: A concept analysis
Higgins, T., Larson, E., & Schnall, R. (2017) · Patient Education and Counseling · doi:10.1016/j.pec.2016.09.002 · Cited by 317 · see citing works
State of the science of maternal–infant bonding: A principle-based concept analysis
Bicking Kinsey, C., & Hupcey, J. E. (2013) · Midwifery · doi:10.1016/j.midw.2012.12.019 · Cited by 287 · see citing works
Self-citationContext and implementation: A concept analysis towards conceptual maturity
Pfadenhauer, L. M., Mozygemba, K., Gerhardus, A., Hofmann, B., Booth, A., Lysdahl, K. B., Tummers, M., Burns, J., & Rehfuess, E. A. (2015) · Zeitschrift für Evidenz, Fortbildung und Qualität im Gesundheitswesen · doi:10.1016/j.zefq.2015.01.004 · Cited by 189 · see citing works
The sustainability of healthcare innovations: a concept analysis
Fleiszer, A. R., Semenic, S. E., Ritchie, J. A., Richer, M., & Denis, J. (2015) · Journal of Advanced Nursing · doi:10.1111/jan.12633 · Cited by 166 · see citing works
Bissonnette, J. M. (2008) · Journal of Advanced Nursing · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2648.2008.04745.x · Cited by 172 · see citing works
Perinatal bereavement: a principle-based concept analysis
Fenstermacher, K., & Hupcey, J. E. (2013) · Journal of Advanced Nursing · doi:10.1111/jan.12119 · Cited by 79 · see citing works
Self-citationA Concept Analysis on the Use of Artificial Intelligence in Nursing
Shang, Z. (2021) · Cureus · doi:10.7759/cureus.14857 · Cited by 53 · see citing works
Women’s experiences of their maternity care: a principle-based concept analysis
Beecher, C., Devane, D., White, M., Greene, R., & Dowling, M. (2020) · Women and Birth · doi:10.1016/j.wombi.2019.11.001 · Cited by 34 · see citing works
- Authors
- Hupcey, J. E., & Penrod, J.
- Affiliations
- Pennsylvania State University (US)
- ORCID
- Hupcey, Judith E.
- Venue
- Research and Theory for Nursing Practice
- Publisher
- Springer Publishing Company
- Published
- 2005-06
- Volume
- 19
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 197-208
- ISSN
- 0889-7182 (ISSN-L)
- 1541-6577
- 1945-7286
- OpenAlex
- W2073440269
- Cited by
- 144
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 8 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 5
- FWCI
- 6.86
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Research and theory for nursing practice (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Methodologies in Health Research and Practice
- Social Sciences › Education › Qualitative Research Methods and Applications
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Diverse Approaches in Healthcare and Education Studies
- Keywords
- conceptual analysis, concept development, theory development, conceptual meaning, state of science, nursing research methodology
- MeSH terms
- Concept Formation, Data Interpretation, Statistical, Humans, Nursing Theory, Philosophy, Nursing, Research Design, Science, Nursing Research, Models, Nursing, Evidence-Based Medicine, Knowledge
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