Search

Abstract: Aims: To analyse published ranking tables on academics’ h‐index scores to establish whether male nursing academics are disproportionately represented in these tables compared with their representation across the whole profession. Background: Previous studies have identified a disproportionate representation of UK male nursing academics in publishing in comparison with their US counterparts. Design: Secondary statistical analysis, which involved comparative correlation of proportions. Methods: Four papers from the UK, Canada, and Australia containing h‐index ranking tables and published between 2010–2017, were reanalysed in June 2017 to identify authors’ sex. Pearson's chi‐squared test was applied to ascertain whether the number of men included in the tables was statistically proportionate to the number of men on the pertinent national professional register. Findings: There was a disproportionate number of men with high h‐index scores in the UK and Canadian data sets, compared with the proportion of men on the pertinent national registers. The number of men in the Australian data set was proportionate with the number of men on the nursing register. There were a disproportionate number of male professors in UK universities. Conclusion: The influence of men over nursing publishing in the UK and Canada outweighs their representation across the whole profession. Similarly, in the UK, men's representation in the professoriate is disproportionately great. However, the Australian results suggest that gender inequality is not inevitable and that it is possible to create more egalitarian nursing cultures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims This study aimed to compare the findings of the quality of nursing doctoral education survey across seven countries and discuss the strategic directions for improving quality. Background No comparative evaluation of global quality of nursing doctoral education has been reported to date despite the rapid increase in the number of nursing doctoral programmes. Design A descriptive, cross-country, comparative design was employed. Methods Data were collected from 2007-2010 from nursing schools in seven countries: Australia, Japan, Korea, South Africa, Thailand, UK and USA. An online questionnaire was used to evaluate quality of nursing doctoral education except for Japan, where a paper version was used. Korea and South Africa used e-mails quality of nursing doctoral education was evaluated using four domains: Programme, Faculty (referring to academic staff), Resource and Evaluation. Descriptive statistics, correlational and ordinal logistic regression were employed. Results A total of 105 deans/schools, 414 faculty and 1149 students/graduates participated. The perceptions of faculty and students/graduates about the quality of nursing doctoral education across the seven countries were mostly favourable on all four domains. The faculty domain score had the largest estimated coefficient for relative importance. As the overall quality level of doctoral education rose from fair to good, the resource domain showed an increased effect. Conclusions Both faculty and students/graduates groups rated the overall quality of nursing doctoral education favourably. The faculty domain had the greatest importance for quality, followed by the programme domain. However, the importance of the resource domain gained significance as the overall quality of nursing doctoral education increased, indicating the needs for more attention to resources if the quality of nursing doctoral education is to improve. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]