PURPOSE. To provide a historical review of processes and methodologies for research validation of nursing diagnoses and suggested directions for future nursing diagnosis research.
SOURCES.Nursing diagnosis research methodologies and processes from the Invitational Conference on Research Methods for Validating Nursing Diagnoses, Nursing Diagnosis: The Journal of Nursing Language and Classification, and the North American Nursing Diagnosis Association (NANDA) conference proceedings for the first through the 12th conferences.
CONCLUSIONS.Future nursing diagnosis research should include concept analysis, expert validation, clinical validation, instrument development, larger studies, powerful statistical analyses, replication and comparison of studies, and concerted efforts to support group research activities that target priority areas of research.
AvantK. (1990). The art and science in nursing diagnosis development. Nursing Diagnosis, 1, 51–56.
2.
AvantK. (1991). Paths to concept development in nursing diagnosis. Nursing Diagnosis, 2, 105–110.
3.
BurgessA.HomstromL. (1974). Rape trauma syndrome. American Journal of Psychiatry, 131, 981–986.
4.
CastlesM. (1982). Interrater agreement in the use of nursing diagnosis. In KimM.MoritzD. (eds)., Classification of nursing diagnoses: Proceedings of the third and fourth national conferences (pp. 153–158). New York: McGraw-Hill.
5.
ChangB.HirschM. (1994). Nursing diagnosis research: Computer-aided research in nursing. Nursing Diagnosis, 5, 6–13.
6.
ChangB.KimM.JonesP.McFarlaneE. (1989). Proceedings of the conference. In Monograph of the invitational conference on research methods for validating nursing diagnoses (pp. 1–2). St. Louis: NANDA.
7.
ClintonJ. (1986). Nursing diagnoses research methodologies. In HurleyM. (ed)., Classification of nursing diagnoses: Proceedings of the sixth conference (pp. 159–167). St. Louis: Mosby.
8.
Craft-RosenbergM.DelaneyC. (1997). Nursing diagnosis extension and classification. In RantzM.LeMoneP. (eds)., Classification of nursing diagnoses: Proceedings of the twelfth conference (pp. 26–31). Glendale, CA: CINAHL.
9.
CreasonN. (1994). Operational and conceptual definition tool development in nursing diagnosis validation research. In Carroll-JohnsonR.M.PaquetteM. (eds)., Classification of nursing diagnoses: Proceedings of the tenth conference (pp. 47–54). Philadelphia: Lippincott.
10.
DoughertyC.JankinJ.LunneyM.WhitleyG. (1993). Conceptual and research-based validation of nursing diagnoses: 1950–1993. Nursing Diagnosis, 4, 156–165.
11.
DreherM. (1990). Ethnographic methods as differentiated from phenomenology. In Monograph of the invitational conference on research methods for validating nursing diagnoses (pp. 78–97). St. Louis: NANDA.
12.
FehringR. (1986). Validating diagnostic labels: Standardizing methodology. In HurleyM. (ed)., Classification of nursing diagnoses: Proceedings of the sixth conference (pp. 183–190). St. Louis: Mosby.
13.
FehringR. (1994). The Fehring model. In Carroll-JohnsonR.M.PaquetteM. (eds)., Classification of nursing diagnoses: Proceedings of the tenth conference (pp. 55–62). Philadelphia: Lippincott.
14.
GebbieK. (ed). (1976). Summary of the second conference: Classification of nursing diagnoses (pp. 19–21). St. Louis: NANDA.
15.
GebbieK., (1984). Approved nursing diagnoses and small group work on diagnostic labels. In KimM.McFarlandG.McLaneA. (eds)., Classification of nursing diagnoses: Proceedings of the fifth national conference (pp. 469–524). St. Louis: Mosby.
16.
GordonM. (1982). Nursing diagnosis: Process and application (1st ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
17.
GordonM. (1987). Nursing diagnosis: Process and application (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
GordonM.SweeneyM. (1979). Methodological problems and issues in identifying and standardizing nursing diagnoses. Advances in Nursing Science, 2, 1–15.
20.
GrantJ.KinneyM. (1991). The need for operational definitions for defining characteristics. Nursing Diagnosis, 2, 181–185.
21.
GrantJ.KinneyM.GuzzettaC.E. (1990). Using magnitude estimation scaling to examine the validity of nursing diagnoses. Nursing Diagnosis, 1, 64–69.
22.
GuzzettaC.ForsythG. (1979). Nursing diagnostic pilot study: Psychophysiologic stress. Advances in Nursing Science, 2, 27–44.
23.
GuzzettaC.KinneyM.GrantJ., (1994). Validating nursing diagnoses using magnitude estimation. In Carroll-JohnsonR.M.PaquetteM. (eds)., Classification of nursing diagnoses: Proceedings of the tenth conference (pp. 42–46). Philadelphia: Lippincott.
24.
HoskinsL. (1989). Clinical validation methodologies for nursing diagnosis research. In Carroll-JohnsonR.M. (ed)., Classification of nursing diagnoses: Proceedings of the eighth conference (pp. 126–131). Philadelphia: Lippincott.
25.
HoskinsL. (1997). How to do a validation study. In RantzM.LeMoneP. (eds)., Classification of nursing diagnoses: Proceedings of the twelfth conference (pp. 79–86). Glendale, CA: CINAHL.
26.
HoskinsL.KerrM.FitzpatrickJ.WarrenJ.AvantK.CarpenitoL.HurleyM.JakobD.LunneyM.MillsW.RottkampB. (1992). Axes: Focus of Taxonomy II. Nursing Diagnosis, 3, 117–123.
27.
International Council of Nurses (1996). The international classification far nursing practice: A unifying framework; The alpha version. Geneva, Switzerland: Author.
28.
KerrM.FitzpatrickJ. (1990). Qualitative research methodologies: Synthesis and recommendations. In Monograph of the invitational conference on research methods for validating nursing diagnoses (pp. 114–120). St. Louis: NANDA.
29.
KimM. (1991). Integrated methods for nursing diagnosis research. In Carroll-JohnsonR. M. (ed)., Classification of nursing diagnoses: Proceedings of the ninth conference (pp. 201–206). Philadelphia: Lippincott.
30.
KimM. (1982). Issues related to research on the classification of nursing diagnosis. In KimM.MoritzD. (eds)., Classification of nursing diagnoses: Proceedings of third and fourth national conferences (pp. 124–137). New York: McGraw-Hill.
31.
KimM.McFarlandG.McLane (eds). (1984). Classification of nursing diagnoses: Proceedings of the fifth national conference. St. Louis: Mosby.
32.
KinneyM.GuzzettaC. (1989). Testing a measuring technique to study nursing diagnosis. In Carroll-JohnsonR. M. (ed)., Classification of nursing diagnoses: Proceedings of the eighth conference (pp. 419–420). Philadelphia: Lippincott.
33.
KnaflK. (1990). Concept development. In Monograph of the invitational conference on research methods for validating nursing diagnoses (pp. 37–63). St. Louis: NANDA.
34.
LackeyN. (1986). Use of the Q methodology in validating defining characteristics of specified nursing diagnoses. In HurleyM. (ed)., Classification of nursing diagnoses: Proceedings of the sixth conference (pp. 191–196). St. Louis: Mosby.
35.
LoC.KimM. (1986). Construct validity of sleep pattern disturbance: A methodology approach. In HurleyM. (ed)., Classification of nursing diagnoses: Proceedings of the sixth conference (pp. 197–206). St. Louis: Mosby.
MaasM.HardyM.CraftM. (1990). Some methodologic considerations in nursing diagnosis research. Nursing Diagnosis, 1, 24–30.
38.
MagnanM. (1995). A Bayesian methodological approach to validation of a nursing diagnosis: Activity tolerance. In RantzM.LeMoneE. P. (eds)., Classification of nursing diagnoses: Proceedings of the eleventh conference (pp. 97–111). Glendale, CA: CINAHL.
39.
MartinK. (1979). Nursing diagnosis of impaired parenting relative to the preschool child: A pilot exploration. In Sigma Theta TauMonograph Series 79, Clinical Nursing Research: Its Strategies and Findings II. Proceedings of the Sixth Annual Nursing Research Conference (pp. 208–220). Indianapolis, IN: Author.
40.
McFarianeE. (1991). Qualitative methods for nursing diagnosis research. In Carroll-JohnsonR. M. (ed)., Classification of nursing diagnoses: Proceedings of the ninth conference (pp. 185–191). Philadelphia: Lippincott.
41.
McLaneA.FehringR. (1984). State of the art of nursing diagnosis. In KimM.McFarlandG.McLaneA. (eds)., Classification of nursing diagnoses: Proceedings of the fifth national conference (pp. 525–540). St. Louis: Mosby.
42.
NicolettiA.ReitzS.GordonM. (1982). A descriptive study of the parenting diagnosis. In KimM.MoritzD. (eds)., Classification of nursing diagnoses: Proceedings of the third and fourth national conferences (pp. 176–183). New York: McGraw-Hill.
SchroederM. (1989). Tool development: Validity related to nursing diagnosis. In Monograph of the invitational conference on research methods for validating nursing diagnoses (pp. 114–120). St. Louis: NANDA.
45.
SchroederM. (1991). Qualitative methods for nursing diagnosis research. In Carroll-JohnsonR. M. (ed)., Classification of nursing diagnoses: Proceedings of the ninth conference (pp. 192–200). Philadelphia: Lippincott.
46.
ShoemakerJ. (1984). Essential features of a nursing diagnosis. In KimM.McFarlandG.McLaneA. (eds)., Classification of nursing diagnoses: Proceedings of the fifth national conference (pp. 104–112). St. Louis: Mosby.
47.
SparksS.Lien-GieschenT. (1994). Modification of the diagnostic content validity model. Nursing Diagnosis, 5, 31–35.
48.
StraussA.CorbinJ. (1990). Grounded theory's applicability to nursing diagnostic research. In Monograph of the invitational conference on research methods for validating nursing diagnoses (pp. 4–24). St. Louis: NANDA.
49.
WhitleyG. (1995). Concept analysis as foundational to nursing diagnosis research. Nursing Diagnosis, 6, 91–92.
50.
WhitleyG. (1996). A multivariate approach for the validation of anxiety and fear. Nursing Diagnosis, 7, 116–124.
