Search

Aim: To explore the health beliefs of clinical and academic nurses from Japan, Australia and China regarding wearing paper masks to protect themselves and others, and to identify differences in participants' health beliefs regarding masks. Background: The correct use of face masks and consensus among health professionals across the globe is essential for containing pandemics, and nurses need to act according to policy to protect themselves, educate the public and preserve resources for frontline health workers. Paper masks are worn by health professionals and the general public to avoid the transmission of respiratory infections, such as COVID‐19, but there appear to be differences in health beliefs of nurses within and between countries regarding these. Methods: This qualitative descriptive study used content analysis with a framework approach. Findings: There were major differences in nurse participants' beliefs between and within countries, including how nurses use paper masks and their understanding of their efficacy. In addition, there were cultural differences in the way that nurses use masks in their daily lives and nursing practice contexts. Conclusion: Nurses from different working environments, countries and areas of practice hold a variety of health beliefs about mask wearing at the personal and professional level. Implications for nursing policy and health policy: The COVID‐19 pandemic has sparked much discussion about the critical importance of masks for the safety of health professionals, and there has been considerable discussion and disagreement about health policies regarding mask use by the general public. Improper use of masks may have a role in creating mask shortages or transmitting infections. An evidence‐based global policy on mask use for respiratory illnesses for health professionals, including nurses, and the general public needs to be adopted and supported by a wide‐reaching education campaign. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There is increasing expectation that research be communicated broadly to share knowledge across industry, professional, governmental, and public spheres. Scholarly publishers can benefit from the sharing of research beyond academia since the potential for societal impact encourages further support from both industry and governmental funders. This paper draws on qualitative in‐depth interview data from Australian‐ and Japanese‐based early career researchers (ECRs) to investigate how higher education institutions support the development of diverse communication skills needed by ECRs to effectively share their research both in academia and beyond. We found that sharing research for academic and other diverse audiences is often perceived as valued but may not always be supported. Output valuing was communicated in performance management, but there were compelling differences between the two nations, with Japanese‐based ECRs reporting a stronger expectation of research outputs for non‐academic audiences than their Australian counterparts. There were also indications that institutional support for both academic and translational outputs may change in response to nations' shifting research priorities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Quality scholarly research outputs, such as peer reviewed journal articles published in reputable journals, are essential for early career researchers' (ECRs) vocational success while also offering benefits for their institutions. Research outputs destined for audiences beyond academia are also increasingly valued by funders, end users, and tertiary institutions. While there is an expectation that ECRs may create diverse research outputs for an array of audiences, the kinds of research output texts produced by ECRs for varied audiences warrants further investigation. In addition, the routes of dissemination that ECRs use to share their academic research outputs to secure impact beyond academia are not well understood. Drawing on semi‐structured interviews of 30 respondents in Australia and Japan, we explore the research‐sharing practices of ECRs, finding that ECRs may potentially create a wide range of research‐informed texts for end users beyond academia, using an array of methods for dissemination. The examples of the output text types and dissemination routes we provide in this paper can be used to inspire ECRs and also more senior academics to share their research more broadly, and perhaps more effectively, and can be used by publishers to improve research impact and support ECRs' research translation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Evidence supporting the practice of skin‐to‐skin contact and breastfeeding soon after birth points to physiologic, social, and psychological benefits for both mother and baby. The 2009 revision of Step 4 of the WHO/UNICEF “Ten Steps to Successful Breastfeeding” elaborated on the practice of skin‐to‐skin contact between the mother and her newly born baby indicating that the practice should be “immediate” and “without separation” unless documented medically justifiable reasons for delayed contact or interruption exist. While in immediate, continuous, uninterrupted skin‐to‐skin contact with mother in the first hour after birth, babies progress through 9 instinctive, complex, distinct, and observable stages including self‐attachment and suckling. However, the most recent Cochrane review of early skin‐to‐skin contact cites inconsistencies in the practice; the authors found “inadequate evidence with respect to details … such as timing of initiation and dose.” This paper introduces a novel algorithm to analyse the practice of skin to skin in the first hour using two data sets and suggests opportunities for practice improvement. The algorithm considers the mother's Robson criteria, skin‐to‐skin experience, and Widström's 9 Stages. Using data from vaginal births in Japan and caesarean births in Australia, the algorithm utilizes data in a new way to highlight challenges to best practice. The use of a tool to analyse the implementation of skin‐to‐skin care in the first hour after birth illuminates the successes, barriers, and opportunities for improvement to achieving the standard of care for babies. Future application should involve more diverse facilities and Robson's classifications. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]