Flyer

Health Science Journal

  • ISSN: 1791-809X
  • Journal h-index: 61
  • Journal CiteScore: 17.30
  • Journal Impact Factor: 18.23
  • Average acceptance to publication time (5-7 days)
  • Average article processing time (30-45 days) Less than 5 volumes 30 days
    8 - 9 volumes 40 days
    10 and more volumes 45 days
Awards Nomination 20+ Million Readerbase
Indexed In
  • Genamics JournalSeek
  • China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI)
  • CiteFactor
  • CINAHL Complete
  • Scimago
  • Electronic Journals Library
  • Directory of Research Journal Indexing (DRJI)
  • EMCare
  • OCLC- WorldCat
  • University Grants Commission
  • Geneva Foundation for Medical Education and Research
  • Euro Pub
  • Google Scholar
  • SHERPA ROMEO
  • Secret Search Engine Labs
Share This Page

Abstract

A peer-driven community-based doctoral supervisory model: development from an evaluation of an ethics workshop for health care professionals undertaking research with children

Hunt Jane

Background: Differing doctoral supervision models currently exist. Three key conceptual supervisory models relevant to doctoral students from within the healthcare professions were identified from a literature review: the ‘functional pre-modern’ model, the ‘team’ model and the ‘community group’ model. However, whilst these models exist, for the most part, supervision remains embedded within home academic institutions. Method and material: (1) An extensive review of the literature was undertaken, drawing on: Australian Education Index, British Education Index, the British Humanities Index, the British Nursing Index, EBSCOHOST EJS and Google™ Scholar; (2) an outcome-oriented evaluation of a workshop delivered to seven current or prospective doctoral candidates from within the health care professions and researching with children and/or young people, concerning the conduct of ethical research was undertaken Results: Five key categories related to ‘best things about the day’ were identified from a four-item, anonymous questionnaire appraising the day. These concerned: round table discussions, plenary seminars, workshop organisation, value of experiential learning and future workshop opportunities. From these themes an ‘innovative’ peer-driven, community based model of doctoral supervision was developed that is extrinsic to and complements the supervision provided in students’ home academic institutions. Conclusions: The innovative supervisory model developed through an outcome-oriented evaluation of a workshop for doctoral candidates has particular relevance for doctoral students who are healthcare professionals generally and nurses in particular, especially those studying in highly specialised areas where there may be a dearth of subject specific supervisors.