NURS 8210 Week 2 Assignment: Nursing Informatics Pioneers
NURS 8210 Week 2 Assignment: Nursing Informatics Pioneers
Skills and or Ideas Demonstrated by the Pioneers
One of the skills that both Simpson and Abbott demonstrated that I may use in life is research skills. The two pioneers were active researchers in the field of nursing informatics. Their roles show that development of effective research skills contribute to the use of best practices in nursing. Therefore, I intend to improve my research skills to ensure that I contribute to the development of the profession and other nurses. The second idea that I can learn from the pioneers is the importance of promoting the competency development in others. Simpson and Abbott showed the importance of knowledge and skill transfer through their roles as lecturers of nursing informatics. I will therefore strive to contribute to the development of others through practices such as coaching and mentorship.
Findings show that religious engagement among students declines during college, but their spirituality shows substantial growth. “Students become more caring, more tolerant, more connected with others, and more actively engaged in a spiritual quest.” (“Cultivating the Spirit – Spirituality in Higher Education”) The authors also found that spiritual growth enhances other outcomes, such as academic performance, psychological well-being, leadership development, and satisfaction with college. The study also identified a number of college activities that contribute to students’ spiritual growth. Some of these–study abroad, interdisciplinary studies, and service learning–appear to be effective because they expose students to new and diverse people, cultures, and ideas. Spiritual development is also enhanced if students engage in “inner work” through activities such as meditation or self-reflection, or if their professors actively encourage them to explore questions of meaning and purpose. (“Cultivating the Spirit – Spirituality in Higher (Alexander W, 2010)”). By raising public awareness of the key role that spirituality plays in student learning and development, by alerting academic administrators, faculty, and curriculum committees to the importance of spiritual development, and by identifying strategies for enhancing that development, this work encourages institutions to give greater priority to these spiritual aspects of students’ educational and professional development
Conclusion
NURS 8210 Week 2 Assignment Nursing Informatics Pioneers
In sum, Simpson and Abbott contributed significantly to nursing practice and informatics. Their professional lives show the ways in which they played a proactive role in ensuring the recognition of informatics in healthcare. The experiences of the pioneers inform the current practice of nurses and nurse informaticists. Therefore, I will strive to translate their lessons into experience to advance the field of nursing informatics.
References
ANIA. (n.d.). American Nursing Informatics Association. https://library.ania.org/ania/speakers/view/160
Ball, M. J., Douglas, J. V., Hinton Walker, P., DuLong, D., Gugerty, B., Hannah, K. J., . . . Troseth, M. R. (Eds.) (2011). Nursing informatics: Where technology and caring meet (4th ed.). London, England: Springer-Verlag.
Center for Integrative Research In Critical Care. (2019, September 9). Patricia a. Abbott, phd, RN, FAAN director of Hillman scholars program, nursing associate professor, nursing. https://mcircc.umich.edu/members/patricia-a-abbott-phd-rn-faan
nef.orgg. (n.d.). Roy L. Simpson. https://www.n-e-f.org/about/board-members-and-executive-director/roy-l-simpson.html
Newbold, S., & Brixey, J. (2016). Nursing Informatics Pioneers Continue to Influence the Profession: A Sustainable Impact. Studies in Health Technology and Informatics, 225, 873–874.
nursing.emory.edu. (n.d.). Roy L. Simpson. https://www.nursing.emory.edu/faculty-staff/roy-l-simpson
Week 2 Assignment: Nursing Informatics Pioneers
The American Reinvestment and Recovery Act’s (ARRA) HiTech Incentive is a major driver in recent health care reform legislation. This act, which was passed in 2009, set aside $22 billion for the adoption of electronic health records (EHRs), with the goal of reaching 100% adoption in all practice settings by 2014. The HiTech Act exemplifies the critical role that health information technology plays in the delivery of high-quality health-care services. Nonetheless, health information technology is a young field. This Application Assignment allows you to investigate the contributions of forefathers in this field and consider how their contributions have influenced health informatics and nursing practice today.
To prepare:
- Visit the AMIA Video Library 1: Nursing Informatics Pioneers webpage listed in the Learning Resources.
- Review the biographies and video presentations of pioneers who are of interest to you, or may hold a position that you aspire to achieve.
- Select two nursing informatics pioneers and conduct further research on their contributions.
- Consider how their contributions have influenced health information technology and nursing practice today.
By Day 7 of Week 2
Write a scholarly 3- to 4-page paper comparing two nursing informatics pioneers. Synthesize your thoughts using the bullets below as a guide:
- What are the professional accomplishments of each individual?
- How have their contributions influenced nursing practice?
- How have their contributions shaped the field of nursing informatics?
- What lessons can you take away from their experiences?
- What skills or ideas demonstrated by these leaders might you apply to your professional practice?
Grading Criteria
Document: Week 2 Application 1 Rubric (Word document)
Submit Your Assignment by Day 7 of Week 2
Week in Review
This week you examined the history of nursing informatics as well as the Technology Informatics Guiding Education Reform (TIGER) initiatives that drive technology education for nurses. Next week you will consider the health information technology needs and viewpoints of stakeholders within an organization and examine the critical role that information systems play in evidence-based practices.
Rubric Detail
In the United States (US), the early adopters, developers, and innovators of technology in nursing practice are referred to as Pioneers of Nursing Informatics. These individuals are the innovators, spear headers, and groundbreakers in the specialty of nursing informatics. This paper seeks to compare two nursing informatics pioneers, Patricia Abbott and Virginia Saba, focusing on their professional accomplishments and how their contributions have influenced nursing practice.
Professional Accomplishments of Each Individual
Dr. Patricia Abbott undertook her nursing degree at the University of Maryland and later developed an interest in informatics. Dr. Abbott was among the first nurses to employ data-mining techniques in nursing (Shortliffe, 2004). She explored the existing databases in long-term care to understand factors that contribute to patient outcomes. In addition, she expanded her preliminary work into the patient safety aspect (Shortliffe, 2004). She ensured strong informatics content in programs funded by the Health Resources and Services Administration and AHRQ (American Medical Informatics Association [AMIA], (2021). She took leadership roles in preparing scholars and practitioners in nursing informatics. Besides, she led the establishment of the ANA Standards of Practice for Nursing Informatics and has been the country’s representative to the International Medical Informatics Association (IMIA) Nursing Special Interest Group.
Dr. Virginia Saba is a nationally and globally recognized pioneer of information technology in nursing. She has led the nursing informatics movement for over 40 years. Dr. Saba started academic technology programs and has supported the expansion of healthcare information technology systems such as the Clinical Care Classification (CCC) System (AMIA, 2021). During her nursing career, Dr. Saba provided national leadership and fostered technology in nursing practice. When serving in academia, she incorporated nursing technology in nursing programs, facilities (AMIA, 2021). She also undertook federally funded research developing CCC System, National Nursing Standard. She is currently the President/CEO of Sabacare Inc & CCC System, where she integrates the CCC system into electronic healthcare documentation systems.
How Their Contributions Have Influenced Nursing Practice
Dr. Abbott’s contributions have influenced nursing practice by helping nurses to provide better patient care resulting in improved health outcomes. She explored existing databases in long-term care, which enabled nurses to understand better factors that contribute to patient outcomes (Shortliffe, 2004). As a result, nurses factor in these factors when planning patient care and implement interventions to improve outcomes. Dr. Abbott’s contributions have also influenced nurses to provide safe patient care (Shortliffe, 2004). Dr. Saba’s contributions have improved patient care efficiency through information technology systems such as the CCC system (AMIA, 2021). The system provides nurses with a unique coding structure for assessing, documenting, and classifying patient care by nurses. Her contribution has also eased and improved nursing documentation, promoting easy access to patients’ health data.
How Their Contributions Have Shaped the Field Of Nursing Informatics
Dr. Abbott’s contributions have shaped nursing informatics by informing nurse informaticians how they can mine data from databases. As a result, informaticians obtain large data sets and use them to improve healthcare delivery (AMIA, 2021). Her contribution in leadership in preparing scholars and practitioners in nursing informatics has helped to increase the number of nurse informaticians, which promotes the growth of the informatics field. Dr. Saba shaped nursing informatics by introducing academic technology programs, which gave nurses the chance to gain informatics knowledge and thus apply technology in nursing practice (AMIA, 2021). She also supported the development of the CCC system, which helps in the electronic documentation of nursing plans of care. Besides, the CCC System is acknowledged as the terminology of choice for documenting patient care in the electronic health record system.
Lessons I Can Take Away From Their Experiences
Dr. Abbott’s experiences teach me to pursue my passion and interests in nursing. For instance, she developed a growing interest in informatics, which led her to pursue a master’s degree in nursing informatics and a Ph.D. in information systems. I have also learned that I should use my leadership skills to influence other nurses and foster the growth of the nursing profession. Lessons learned from Dr. Saba include using my knowledge and skills to develop innovative ways to improve patient care delivery. Besides, I should use my leadership position to promote the growth of the nursing profession. I should also use my leadership power to advocate and lead movements that promote the greater good in the nursing profession.
Skills or Ideas Demonstrated That I Might Apply To My Professional Practice
Dr. Abbott’s used her leadership to prepare scholars and practitioners in nursing informatics. I would apply this idea of using my leadership position to draw more scholars and nurses to my nursing specialty or towards a certain course that will improve nursing practice. Dr. Saba used her informatics knowledge, skills, and expertise to initiate academic technology programs (AMIA, 2021). I can use my nursing knowledge and skills to establish programs that equip nurses with specific specialty skills.
Conclusion
Dr. Abbott and Dr. Saba are nursing informatics pioneers who have contributed immensely to influencing nursing practice and shaping nursing informatics. Dr. Abbott employed data mining techniques to help understand factors affecting patient outcomes. She has used her leadership role to equip other nurses with informatics skills and represent other nurse informaticians. Dr. Saba established academic technology programs and developed the CCC System used in coding and documentation. Her efforts have helped improve patient care delivery for nurses.
References
American Medical Informatics Association. (2021). Nursing informatics innovators: Patricia Abbott. AMIA – American Medical Informatics Association. https://amia.org/community/working-groups/nursing-informatics/nursing-informatics-innovators-patricia-abbott
American Medical Informatics Association. (2021). Nursing informatics innovators: Virginia K. Saba. AMIA – American Medical Informatics Association. https://amia.org/community/working-groups/nursing-informatics/nursing-informatics-innovators-virginia-k-saba
Shortliffe, E. H. (2004). American College of Medical Informatics Fellows and International Associates, 2003. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association: JAMIA, 11(3), 225–233. https://doi.org/10.1197/jamia.M1521
Select Grid View or List View to change the rubric’s layout.
Name: NURS_8210_Week1_Discussion_Rubric
| Excellent | Good | Fair | Poor | |||
| RESPONSIVENESS TO DISCUSSION QUESTION
Discussion post minimum requirements: *The original posting must be completed by Wednesday, Day 3, at 11:59pm MST. Two response postings to two different peer original posts, on two different days, are required by Saturday, Day 6, at 11:59pm MST. Faculty member inquiries require responses, which are not included in the minimum number of posts. Your Discussion Board postings should be written in standard edited English and follow APA style for format and grammar as closely as possible given the constraints of the online platform. Be sure to support the postings with specific citations from this week’s Learning Resources as well as resources available through the Walden University online databases. Refer to the Essential Guide to APA Style for Walden Students to ensure your in-text citations and reference list are correct. |
8 (26.67%) – 8 (26.67%)
Discussion postings and responses exceed the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: Respond to the question being asked or the prompt provided; – Go beyond what is required in some meaningful way (e.g., the post contributes a new dimension, unearths something unanticipated); -Are substantive, reflective, with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings and current credible evidence. – Demonstrate significant ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning -Resources as well as additional resources and has read, viewed, or considered a sampling of colleagues’ postings; -Exceed the minimum requirements for discussion posts*. |
7 (23.33%) – 7 (23.33%)
Discussion postings and responses meet the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: -Respond to the question being asked or the prompt provided; -Are substantive, reflective, with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings and current credible evidence.re -Demonstrate ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning Resources and has read, viewed, or considered a sampling of colleagues’ postings -Meet the minimum requirements for discussion posts*. |
6 (20%) – 6 (20%)
Discussion postings and responses are minimally responsive to the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: – do not clearly address the objectives of the discussion or the question or prompt; and/or -May (lack) lack in depth, reflection, analysis, or synthesis but rely more on anecdotal than scholarly evidence; and/or -Do not adequately demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning -Resources and/or a sampling of colleagues’ postings; and/or has posted by the due date at least in part. – Lack ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Do not meet the minimum requirements for discussion posts*. |
0 (0%) – 5 (16.67%)
Discussion postings and responses are unresponsive to the requirements of the Discussion instructions. They: – do not clearly address the objectives of the discussion or the question or prompt; and/or – Lack in substance, reflection, analysis, or synthesis but rely more on anecdotal than scholarly evidence. – Lack ability to generalize and extend thinking and evaluate theories or concepts within the topic or context of the discussion. -Do not demonstrate that the student has read, viewed, and considered the Learning Resources and/or a sampling of colleagues’ postings; and/or does not meet the minimum requirements for discussion posts*. |
||
| CONTENT KNOWLEDGE | 8 (26.67%) – 8 (26.67%)
Discussion postings and responses: -demonstrate in-depth understanding and application of concepts and issues presented in the course (e.g., insightful interpretations including analysis, synthesis and/or evaluation of topic; – are well supported by pertinent research/evidence from a variety of and multiple peer- reviewed books and journals, where appropriate; -Demonstrate significant mastery and thoughtful/accurate application of content, applicable skills or strategies presented in the course. |
7 (23.33%) – 7 (23.33%)
Discussion postings and responses: -demonstrate understanding and application of the concepts and issues presented in the course, presented with some understanding and application of concepts and issues presented in the course (e.g., insightful interpretations including analysis, synthesis and/or evaluation of topic; -are supported by research/evidence from peer-reviewed books and journals, where appropriate; and · demonstrate some mastery and application of content, applicable skills, or strategies presented in the course. |
6 (20%) – 6 (20%)
Discussion postings and responses: – demonstrate minimal understanding of concepts and issues presented in the course, and, although generally accurate, display some omissions and/or errors; –lack support by research/evidence and/or the research/evidence is inappropriate or marginal in quality; and/or lack of analysis, synthesis or evaluation of topic – demonstrate minimal content, skills or strategies presented in the course. ——-Contain numerous errors when using the skills or strategies presented in the course |
0 (0%) – 5 (16.67%)
Discussion postings and responses demonstrate: -A lack of understanding of the concepts and issues presented in the course; and/or are inaccurate, contain many omissions and/or errors; and/or are not supported by research/evidence; and/or lack of analysis, synthesis or evaluation of topic -Many critical errors when discussing content, applicable skills or strategies presented in the course. |
||
| CONTRIBUTION TO THE DISCUSSION | 8 (26.67%) – 8 (26.67%)
Discussion postings and responses significantly contribute to the quality of the discussion/interaction and thinking and learning by: -providing Rich and relevant examples; discerning and thought-provoking ideas; and stimulating thoughts and probes; – -demonstrating original thinking, new perspectives, and extensive synthesis of ideas supported by the literature. |
7 (23.33%) – 7 (23.33%)
Discussion postings and responses contribute to the quality of the discussion/interaction and thinking and learning by -providing relevant examples; thought-provoking ideas – Demonstrating synthesis of ideas supported by the literature |
6 (20%) – 6 (20%)
Discussion postings and responses minimally contribute to the quality of discussion/interaction and thinking and learning by: – providing few and/or irrelevant examples; and/or – providing few if any thought- provoking ideas; and/or -. Information that is restated from the literature with no/little demonstration of critical thinking or synthesis of ideas. |
0 (0%) – 5 (16.67%)
Discussion postings and responses do not contribute to the quality of interaction/discussion and thinking and learning as they do not: -Provide examples (or examples are irrelevant); and/or -Include interesting thoughts or ideas; and/or – Demonstrate of critical thinking or synthesis of ideas |
||
| QUALITY OF WRITING | 6 (20%) – 6 (20%)
Discussion postings and responses exceed doctoral -level writing expectations. They: · Use grammar and syntax that is clear, concise, and appropriate to doctoral level writing; · Make few if any errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; · Use original language and refrain from directly quoting original source materials; -provide correct APA · Are positive, courteous, and respectful when offering suggestions, constructive feedback, or opposing viewpoints. |
5 (16.67%) – 5 (16.67%)
Discussion postings and responses meet doctoral -level writing expectations. They: ·Use grammar and syntax that is clear and appropriate to doctoral level writing; ; · Make a few errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; · paraphrase but refrain from directly quoting original source materials; Provide correct APA format · Are courteous and respectful when offering suggestions, constructive feedback, or opposing viewpoints;. |
4 (13.33%) – 4 (13.33%)
Discussion postings and responses are minimally below doctoral-level writing expectations. They: · Make more than occasional errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; · Directly quote from original source materials and/or paraphrase rather than use original language; lack correct APA format; and/or · Are less than courteous and respectful when offering suggestions, feedback, or opposing viewpoints. |
0 (0%) – 3 (10%)
Discussion postings and responses are well below doctoral -level writing expectations. They: · Use grammar and syntax that is that is unclear · Make many errors in spelling, grammar, and syntax; and –use incorrect APA format · Are discourteous and disrespectful when offering suggestions, feedback, or opposing viewpoints. |
||
| Total Points: 30 | ||||||
Name: NURS_8210_Week1_Discussion_Rubric