Search

To evaluate the type and quality of child care used by low-income families who were either receiving or not receiving subsidized child care, we interviewed 111 African American parents from a randomly selected sample of low-income families. We inquired about their child-care use, satisfaction with care, work stress, and employment history. Using standardized assessment instruments, independent observers in the children's child-care setting evaluated the quality of the care and characteristics of the providers. We found that families using subsidized child care were more likely to use center care and other more formal types of care, while families not using subsidized child care were more likely to use a relative in the relative's home. Families using subsidized care tended to use licensed and registered child-care arrangements more than non-subsidized families. Also, subsidized families spent approximately half as much out-of-pocket money for child care. However, we found no evidence that the care used by families using subsidized care was of any higher quality than that used by non-subsidized families. We examine the possibility that child-care subsidy programs may not be adequately designed or funded to increase the availability of quality child care to low-income families. Educators and policy makers may want to consider additional means of increasing access to quality care in low-income families.

The stability of a 2-factor model proposed for the Gibb Experimental Test of Testwiseness was studied with 173 undergraduates. Confirmatory factor analysis results indicate that data fit the two-factor model and a simpler one-factor model. The Gibb test could be characterized as tapping a general testwiseness proficiency. (SLD)

Aims: The aims of the study were to compare characteristics, resources, benefits and outcomes of academic‐clinical collaborations of nursing researcher leaders from academic, clinical and joint‐employer sites. Background: Few research‐based publications addressed academic‐clinical research collaborations. New knowledge could increase nursing and multidisciplinary research productivity, including implementation science. Design: An anonymous survey using a 40‐item questionnaire. Methods: Information letters with a link to the questionnaire were emailed to United States nursing research leaders. Data were grouped by institution type: academic, clinical or joint‐employer. Analyses included Kruskal–Wallis tests for ordered responses, Pearson's chi‐square test or Fisher's exact test for categorical responses and Cohen's Kappa agreement statistic for expected and actual time devoted to research. STROBE guidelines were followed. Results: Of 120 respondents from academic (n = 60; 50.0%), clinical (n = 53; 41.2%) and joint‐employer (n = 7; 5.8%) sites, 78.3%, 92.3% and 100%, respectively, were from metropolitan areas. Mean (SD) priority for active collaborations was higher at joint‐employer sites; p =.002. Clinical sites were more likely to have directors of evidence‐based practice (p =.031) and informatics (p =.008) and librarians (p =.029). Sites with collaborations were more likely to have access to research subjects (p =.008) and post‐award research account management (p =.045). By collaboration status, there were no differences in the number of ethics board‐approved studies. Collaborating site benefits were perceived to be executive leadership support (p =.003), greater research engagement by clinical nurses (p =.048), more co‐authored publications (p =.048) and more abstracts accepted at national meetings (p =.044). Despite more resources and perceived benefits, outcomes did not differ by collaboration status. Conclusions: Sites with and without academic‐clinical research collaborations differed; however, outcomes were similar. Future efforts should focus on nurse scientist collaboration to address important clinical questions aimed at improving clinical outcomes. Relevance to Clinical Practice: Despite some successful outcomes, potential benefits of academic‐clinical research collaborations have not been fully actualised. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article continues current research attempts to determine factors, or combinations of factors, which influence efficacy in problem-solving behaviors. Quantitative literature is reviewed in the area of problem solving with emphasis in both (1) the interacting influences of strategies and knowledge, and (2) the influence of strategies independent of knowledge. Suggested applications of the research to the educational setting are provided. Findings suggest that increasing levels of knowledge permit an individual to engage in increasingly higher levels of reflective thinking involving metacognitive strategies. It appears that these processes encourage elaboration on a problem and are instrumental in producing the most efficient problem-solving behaviors., How do individuals become more successful problem-solvers? How do they use what they know about specific domains or subject areas and how is this influenced by their problem-solving strategies? How [...]

Academic-clinical research partnerships can benefit academic and clinical partners when goals are clearly articulated and mutually determined and include increased research dissemination and lower research costs. This article explores the history of academic-clinical research partnerships and discusses the drivers of collaborative academic-clinical research relationships, resources from academia and clinical sites, and sustainability of collaborative partnerships. Through collaboration, academic-clinical partners can improve clinical outcomes and reduce healthcare costs.