Viewpoint provides a forum for scholarly discussion about the theoretical, philosophical, and practical issues related to nursing language and classification systems. The sometimes controversial views are intended to stimulate readers' comments and perspectives. We welcome brief, informal responses to published viewpoints. If you have a viewpoint you want to submit, or if you want to discuss it beforehand, contact the column editor: judithwilkins@att.net;
913.631.1089.
ChangB.UmanG.HirschM. (1948). Predictive power of clinical indicators for self-care deficit. Nursing Diagnosis: The Journal of Nursing Language and Classification, 9, 71–82.
2.
GebbieK.LavinM. (1998). Utilization of a classification of nursing diagnoses. Nursing Diagnosis: The Journal of Nursing Language and Classification, GebbieK.LavinM. eds 1975. St. Louis: Mosby.
3.
GordonM. (1998). President's reflections. Nursing Diagnosis: The Journal of Nursing language and Classification9(Suppl. 2), 5–6.
4.
HoskinsL.M. (1998). Issues, times, and work during my NANDA presidency. Nursing Diagnosis: The Journal of Nursing Language and Classification9(Suppl.2), 7–8.
5.
ParkerL.LunneyM. (1998). Moving beyond content validation ot nursing diagnoses. Nursing Diagnosis: The Journal of Nursing Language and Classification, 9, 144–151).
6.
WakefieldB. (1998). The center for nursing classification. Nursing Diagnosis: The Journal of Nursing Language and Classification, 9, 159–160.
7.
WarrenJ. (1998). Joining the computer-based patient record world. Nursing Diagnosis: The Journal of Nursing Language and Classification9(Suppl.2), 8–9.
