Identify Two GCU Library Scholarly Databases That Will Help

identify Two Gcu Library Scholarly Databases That Will Help You Find

Identify two GCU Library scholarly databases that will help you find the best research articles to support your capstone project change proposal. Discuss why these two databases are better than Google Scholar or a general Internet search.

The Institute of Medicine has stated a goal that 90% of practice be evidence-based by 2020. According to HealthyPeople.gov, the United States is currently at approximately 15%. Discuss two barriers that might hold nursing practice from achieving this goal and suggest ways in which identified barriers may be addressed.

Paper For Above instruction

In the pursuit of advancing nursing practice and ensuring that clinical decisions are grounded in robust evidence, it is essential to utilize specialized scholarly databases that provide comprehensive and credible research articles. Two prominent databases available through the Grand Canyon University (GCU) Library that serve this purpose effectively are CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature) and PubMed. These databases surpass general search engines like Google Scholar in several critical ways, making them invaluable tools for scholarly research and evidence-based practice development.

CINAHL Database

CINAHL is a specialized database focusing on nursing and allied health literature. It offers extensive indexing of more than 3,000 journals in nursing, biomedicine, health sciences, and related fields. Unlike Google Scholar, which indexes scholarly articles across innumerable disciplines with varying levels of quality and relevance, CINAHL curates content specific to nursing and healthcare, ensuring that search results are highly relevant to nursing practice and research. Additionally, CINAHL provides detailed indexing with subject headings and thesaurus options, enabling precise searches for evidence-based articles, clinical guidelines, and practice protocols. Its filters for peer-reviewed content, publication date, and research methodology further enhance the quality and applicability of search results, thereby supporting the development of well-founded change proposals.

PubMed

PubMed is another robust scholarly database maintained by the National Institutes of Health's National Library of Medicine. It encompasses a vast array of biomedical literature, including research articles, clinical studies, systematic reviews, and practice guidelines. While PubMed includes a broader scope than CINAHL, it is also distinguished by its comprehensive indexing and access to high-quality, peer-reviewed articles. PubMed's advanced search features, including Medical Subject Headings (MeSH), allow for sophisticated querying that can pinpoint the most relevant and recent evidence supporting clinical practices. Its integration with clinical guidelines from organizations such as the CDC and WHO makes it a vital resource for evidence-based practice initiatives. Compared to Google Scholar, PubMed offers more reliable filtering options, structured metadata, and a focus on health sciences that align closely with nursing and healthcare research needs.

Why These Databases Are Superior to Google Scholar and General Internet Searches

While Google Scholar is a convenient tool that offers free access to scholarly articles, it lacks the specialized indexing and filtering features found in databases like CINAHL and PubMed. Google Scholar includes a wide variety of document types, some of which may not undergo rigorous peer review, which can compromise the quality of evidence gathered. Furthermore, it offers limited filters for research methodology or clinical relevance, requiring users to manually sift through results to find appropriate evidence.

Similarly, general Internet searches are often unfiltered and include non-scholarly sources, opinions, and unverified information, which can be detrimental when making clinical or practice-change decisions. In contrast, CINAHL and PubMed offer curated, peer-reviewed, and recent research articles, essential for formulating credible, evidence-based proposals. Their advanced search capabilities, inclusion of clinical practice guidelines, and filters for research quality ensure that clinicians find accurate, relevant, and high-quality evidence efficiently—attributes crucial for supporting impactful improvements in nursing practice.

Barriers to Achieving Evidence-Based Practice in Nursing

Despite the clear benefits of evidence-based practice (EBP), the United States lags significantly behind the Institute of Medicine's (IOM) goal that 90% of practice be evidence-based by 2020. Currently, only about 15% of practice aligns with the highest levels of evidence, indicating substantial barriers. Two major obstacles are the lack of time and limited access to quality resources, which hinder nurses from integrating research findings into clinical practice.

Barrier 1: Lack of Time

Nurses often work in fast-paced, high-demand environments where immediate patient care takes precedence over research activities. The demanding schedules leave little time for reviewing literature, critically appraising research evidence, or implementing new practice guidelines. Consequently, this limits the adoption of evidence-based interventions, perpetuating reliance on traditional or anecdotal practices.

Addressing this barrier involves restructuring workflows to allocate protected time for education and research activities. Hospitals and healthcare organizations can incorporate dedicated periods within shifts for nurses to review current literature, attend evidence-based practice meetings, and participate in continuing education focused on recent research developments. Furthermore, integrating EBP discussions into team rounds and regular meetings ensures that evidence becomes a seamless part of routine practice.

Barrier 2: Limited Access to High-Quality Resources

Another significant barrier is the insufficient access to credible, up-to-date research databases and journals, especially in resource-limited settings. Without easy access to comprehensive databases like CINAHL or PubMed, nurses find it challenging to locate the latest evidence or clinical guidelines necessary for informed decision-making.

To overcome this obstacle, healthcare institutions must invest in subscription-based databases and ensure that all nursing staff are trained in effective literature search strategies. Additionally, fostering partnerships with academic institutions and utilizing open-access repositories can improve resource availability. Continuing education programs that emphasize information literacy empower nurses to efficiently navigate scholarly databases and identify high-quality evidence, thus bridging the gap between research and practice.

Conclusion

In conclusion, leveraging specialized databases such as CINAHL and PubMed enhances the ability of nurses to access relevant, peer-reviewed evidence that can inform practice changes. These databases are superior to general Internet searches because they offer curated, high-quality, and highly relevant research tailored to healthcare professionals. Overcoming barriers like lack of time and limited resource access is essential to advancing evidence-based nursing practice. Strategies such as dedicated time for research activities and improved access to scholarly resources are vital steps toward achieving the ambitious goal of 90% evidence-based practice in the healthcare system.

References

  • CINAHL Complete. (2023). EBSCO Information Services.
  • U.S. National Library of Medicine. (2023). PubMed. National Institutes of Health.
  • HealthyPeople.gov. (2020). Evidence-based practice in nursing. Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion.
  • Institute of Medicine. (2011). The Future of Nursing: Leading Change, Advancing Health. The National Academies Press.
  • Melnyk, B. M., & Fineout-Overholt, E. (2015). Evidence-Based Practice in Nursing & Healthcare: A Guide to Best Practice. Wolters Kluwer.
  • Levy, C., & Feder, S. (2020). Strategies for Promoting Evidence-Based Practice in Nursing. Journal of Nursing Administration, 50(4), 203-209.
  • Shaw, T. R., & Unruh, K. (2019). Barriers and Facilitators to Implementing Evidence-Based Practice in Nursing. Worldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing, 16(3), 164-171.
  • Proctor, E., et al. (2015). Outcomes for implementation research: Conceptual distinctions, measurement challenges, and research agenda. Administration and Policy in Mental Health, 42(2), 44-59.
  • Estabrooks, C. A., et al. (2018). Building Capacity for Evidence-Based Practice in Healthcare. Worldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing, 15(5), 347-356.
  • Suzuki, T., & Olson, J. (2017). Literature review and evidence-based practice. Nursing Practice Today, 4(2), 15-22.

Related Assignments