Skip to content

Posts from the ‘Journal Information’ Category

Identifying Coping Mechanisms for Veterans Suffering Moral Injury


The current ANS featured article is titled “Moral Injury in Veterans: Application of the Roy Adaptation Model to Improve Coping” authored by Michael Cox, DNP, MHA, RN; Vonda Skjolsvik, DNP, RN, CHSE; Becki Rathfon, MS, CCMHC; and Ellen Buckner, PhD, RN, CNE, AE. We invite you to download this article at no cost while it is featured, and return here to leave your comments and questions! Dr. Cox has shared his personal reflections about this article for ANS readers:

Michael Cox

The concept that one’s morally transgressive behavior may result in lasting harm to the individual’s well-being is thoroughly documented in historical literature, as ancient cultures struggled to explain and cope with warrior reintegration. In more modern times, Civil War soldiers were diagnosed with “soldiers’ heart” or profound melancholy. In WWI, the condition was described as “shell shock.” WWII introduced the term “battle fatigue,” and the Vietnam Veterans were diagnosed with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). However, mental health professionals are beginning to understand that these terms do not fully capture war’s moral and ethical implications. As a result, they fail to fully capture the soldiers’ challenges as they transition into civil society.

Shortly after the start of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, my military colleagues and I began to recognize the harmful effects of deployment. The concerns about our comrades’ psychological well-being escalated as current treatment modalities proved to be ineffective. The inability to explain our observations prompted us to refer to these soldiers “as broken.” Currently, 22 veterans commit suicide each day in the United States, and the rate of suicide among veterans 18 to 34 years of age has risen 80% compared to the civilian population.

Acknowledgment that the suffering of these soldiers does not resolve upon exiting the military; prompted our team to explore the concept of moral injury (MI) in relation to veteran suicide. MI is the damage done to one’s conscience or moral compass when the person perpetrates, witnesses, or fails to prevent acts that transgress one’s own moral beliefs, values, or ethical code of conduct. Our study describes the struggles veterans face as they try to reassemble their lives post-war.

Breaching moral boundaries has created dissonance between the veterans’ conscience and subconscious thoughts regarding right and wrong, resetting the individual’s fundamental identity and impeding their ability to develop relationships and maintain group identity. This inner struggle helps explain the previously determined feelings of betrayal, guilt, and irredeemablity frequently seen in veterans with MI. Unfortunately, I feel like I am reliving the past as the trauma experienced by our health care providers due to Covid-19 is manifesting in the same manner that we witnessed in those returning from deployment. It creates an environment where clinicians, similar to our veterans, struggle to reconcile the incongruence between their perceived ethical standards and those they are witnessing daily. Exploring the implications of this moral discord may be necessary to avert a similar crisis in our healthcare professionals. 

Addressing health disparities: the importance of culturally tailored interventions


Eun-Ok Im

The current featured article is titled “Components of Culturally Tailored Interventions: A Discussion Paper” authored by Eun-Ok Im, PhD, MPH, RN, CNS, FAAN and Wonshik Chee, PhD. This article is available for 2.5 professional development credits, and is available for download at no cost while it is featured! Dr. Im has provided this background information that adds further to their article!

Throughout nursing history, we, nurses, have been on the frontline of the battles against health disparities, and have strived to provide culturally competent care for racial/ethnic minorities who are frequently discriminated and underserved in our health care systems.  Culturally tailored interventions are one of the products from the battles to have us equipped with necessary competence to provide better health care for all human beings regardless of their race/ethnicity. Considering the recent rise of racially motivated violence and discrimination against racial/ethnic minorities, it would be meaningful for us to reflect on culturally tailored interventions that have been our instruments in the battles against health disparities.

To start this blog, I am including a picture of a modern high-rise building with a Buddhist temple entrance. This is a typical scene of our daily life with a mixture of cultures that supports ourselves as cultural beings. As a researcher working on cross-cultural women’s health issues, from the beginning of my career as a nurse researcher/scientist, I have been frequently involved in the discussions on human beings as cultural beings, the complexity of culture, and culturally appropriate and sound approaches to culturally diverse populations. Many nurse researchers and scholars have talked about how to ensure cultural equivalence of wordings used in the questionnaires, how to ensure the accuracy of translations in research process, and if cultural matching would be needed, etc.  Also, nurse researchers and scholars have talked about inherent post-modern dilemmas in cross-cultural research (e.g., generalizability, etc.). However, it is very recent that our nursing community begins to talk about what makes an intervention be a “culturally tailored” intervention.In recent years, “cultural tailoring” became a buzz word among nurse researchers/scientists who are working with racial/ethnic minorities. With a recent high funding priority on health disparity research, an increasing number of nurse researchers/scientists began to develop and test culturally tailored interventions among specific cultural groups of racial/ethnic minorities.  Cultural tailoring sounds very simple in a way, but it requires researchers/scientists to give their special attention to many complex and various aspects of the interventions.  However, very little is still clearly known about the principles and processes of cultural tailoring although there have been some advances in the tailoring methods (e.g., surface tailoring, deep tailoring).

In this paper, we proposed suggestions for what would be essential in culturally tailored interventions based on our experience in multiple culturally tailored intervention studies, especially technology-based interventions.  Thus, the components that we are proposing might not be easily generalizable to the interventions that are not technology-based.  However, we made an assumption that cultural tailoring in both technology-based interventions and non-technology-based interventions would be similar in most aspects except the intervention medium.  Yet, technology-based interventions do not require physical transportation of the users and may not provide tangible in-person interactions.  Also, there are many unique characteristics of technology-based interventions that traditional interventions might not have (e.g., 24 hour access, required computer literacy, etc.). Thus, I hope that readers would be careful about the interpretation of the findings and suggestions.

Despite the limitations of the findings and suggestions that we made in this paper, most of our suggestions could be easily applicable to any culturally tailored interventions.  For instance, the suggestion to consider if their interventions specifically meet culturally unique needs of target populations could be applicable to any culturally tailored interventions using various different intervention media.  Cultural tailoring definitely needs to address culturally unique needs of the specific population. Otherwise, the intervention would not be easily accepted by the target group, and the intervention would be useless without the acceptance by the actual users. Also, the suggestion on the use of multiple languages and culturally matched bilingual research team members would be applicable to any culturally tailored interventions in a different medium.  For surface tailoring, the use of multiple languages and culturally matched bilingual research team members has been frequently emphasized in any culturally tailored interventions although it is new to find that they are essential even for non-face-to-face technology-based interventions.  Indeed, at the beginning era of the Internet usages, researchers thought that non-face-to-face interactions would eliminate the influences of race/ethnicity on human interactions. However, the findings reported in this paper support that culturally tailoring is necessary even for technology-based interventions, and the impact of race/ethnicity on human interactions still remain even in non-face-to-face interventions using computers and mobile devices.

All the suggestions, however, need researchers’ careful reflections on the benefits and costs involved.  For instance, we suggested researchers’ flexibility in intervention process (e.g., timing, intervention medium) to accommodate special and unique needs of their target populations. This flexibility will definitely increase the recruitment rate of potential research participants and will be helpful in retaining the participation throughout the intervention period.  However, at the same time, this could be a source of biases in determining the effects of the intervention on targeted outcomes of the research participants. Thus, researchers who are thinking of adopting flexible arrangements/strategies for their research participants need to consider possible biases that would be brought up by the arrangements/strategies and need to balance the losses and gains from adopting the arrangements/strategies.

We really appreciate this opportunity to discuss about the essential components in culturally tailored interventions, which would be pivotal for future nursing care and practice with racial/ethnic minority populations.  Hope that this article would urge nurses to further reflect on and discuss about future directions of culturally tailored interventions in nursing and contribute to advances in practical knowledge that is needed for development, implementation, evaluation, and refinement of culturally tailored interventions for racial/ethnic minority populations who are in great needs.  These efforts would definitely strengthen our instruments for future usages in our battles against health disparities.

Decolonizing the Language of Nursing


Daniel Suárez-Baquero

The current featured ANS article is titled “Critical Analysis of the Nursing Metaparadigm in Spanish-Speaking Countries Is the Nursing Metaparadigm Universal?” by Daniel F. M. Suárez-Baquero, MSN, RN;and Lorraine Olszewski Walker, EdD, MPH, RN. This article is available to download at no cost while it is featured, and we welcome your comments and questions here. Here is author Suárez-Baquero’s message for ANS readers about this work:

ENGLISH

This paper presents a critical analysis about the dominance of the English language as tool for colonization. We start from the use of the nursing metaparadigm – as the central component of Nursing knowledge – to elucidate the conceptual differences in Nursing foundations that exist due to social and linguistic differences.

For those nurses who learn Nursing in Spanish, the concept of Cuidado – amalgamation of the nuances of Care and Caring – is the cornerstone of the core disciplinary Nursing knowledge. However, this foundational perspective, rooted in most of the Nursing spoken in Romance languages, has been historically underrecognized. Several academic discussions about Nursing concepts and theories that I had with well-known nursing theorists during my doctoral studies brought up an overlooked issue: Meanings differences in the nuances and concepts from languages other than English.

Importantly, this issue has limited the expansion of disciplinary nursing knowledge. Therefore, in several instances, Nursing knowledge turns into a dogmatic believe that cannot be discussed; so that we, scholars who discuss the universality of Nursing knowledge, are seen as heretics in a seemingly homogenous and hegemonic vision of nursing.

This paper is an invitation to discuss, it is an awareness of the multiculturality that must be addressed for the growth of Nursing as a Science; it is a call to the nurses of color around the world, to let them know that the time has come to speak up and share our vision of Nursing. Nonetheless, the decolonization of disciplinary Nursing knowledge cannot be done without the support by the nursing community that dictates “what [Nursing] is, and what it is not.”

 

ESPAÑOL

Este artículo presenta un análisis crítico acerca del dominio de la lengua inglesa como herramienta de colonización. Partimos del uso del metaparadigma de Enfermería – como el componente central del conocimiento enfermero – para elucidar las diferencias conceptuales en los fundamentos de la Enfermería que existen debido a las diferencias sociales y lingüísticas.

Para aquellas enfermeras y enfermeros que aprenden Enfermería en español, el concepto de Cuidado – amalgama del acto de enfermería y el acto de cuidar con amor o cariño – es la piedra angular del conocimiento central de la Enfermería. Sin embargo, esta perspectiva fundacional, arraigada en la mayor parte de la Enfermería hablada en lenguas romances, ha sido históricamente poco reconocida. Varias discusiones académicas sobre conceptos y teorías de enfermería que mantuve con conocidas teóricas de la enfermería durante mis estudios de doctorado sacaron a relucir una cuestión que se había pasado por alto: Las diferencias de significado en los matices y conceptos de otros idiomas distintos al inglés.

Es importante destacar que este problema ha limitado la expansión del conocimiento disciplinar de la Enfermería. Por lo tanto, en varios casos, el conocimiento de Enfermería se convierte en una creencia dogmática que no puede ser discutida; de modo que nosotros, los académicos que discutimos la universalidad del conocimiento enfermero, somos vistos como herejes en una visión aparentemente homogénea y hegemónica de la enfermería

Este artículo es una invitación a la discusión, es una toma de conciencia de la multiculturalidad que debe ser abordada para el crecimiento de la Enfermería como ciencia; es un llamado a las enfermeras y enfermeros de color de todo el mundo, para hacerles saber que ha llegado el momento de hablar y compartir nuestra visión de la Enfermería. Sin embargo, la descolonización del conocimiento disciplinar de Enfermería no puede hacerse sin el apoyo de la comunidad enfermera que dicta “qué es, y qué no es [Enfermería] “.

 

Conceptual Framework of Self-Advocacy


The current ANS featured article is titled “A Conceptual Framework of Self-advocacy in Women With Cancer” authored by Teresa H. Thomas, PhD, RN; Heidi S. Donovan, PhD, RN; Margaret Q. Rosenzweig, PhD, CRNP-C, AOCNP, FAAN; Catherine M. Bender, PhD, RN, FAAN; and Yael Schenker, MD, MAS, FAAHPM. In this article the authors discuss new insights about the process of self-advocacy. Here is a message from Dr. Thomas about this work:

Teresa Thomas

The past two decades have seen increasing attention put on “patient-centered care.” Healthcare systems and providers strive to put the patient at the forefront of their services. But what about the patient? What are we asking patients to do when we attempt to be patient-centered? How are we asking them to do so? And importantly, are all patients equally able to engage in patient-centered care?

Our team’s research in patient self-advocacy strives to answer these questions in the context of women with cancer. What happens when a woman with cancer encounters a challenging situation?  How does she assert her values and priorities to ensure her needs are met? This article presents our conceptual framework of self-advocacy among women with cancer.

Through our work with women with cancer, we know that not all individuals can speak up for themselves. Individuals quickly learn that if they don’t assert themselves, their care will at best not meet with needs and at worst be mismanaged and lead to their own poor health:

    • Individuals get lost in the healthcare system because they don’t know how to question their providers or seek clarification about their health.
    • Individuals hesitate to share the side-effects of treatment with their social circles because they don’t want to be considered a burden.
    • Individuals neglect their needs for the sake of not being perceived as rude or questioning.

Two observations drive this work. First, we noticed that research in patient empowerment and self-management focused on supporting patients in performing the tasks of managing their illness. While critical, we also recognize that individuals need support in doing more than just the “tasks” of being a patient. We want to create a language and framework that recognize the individual holistically and point to ways in which they can use their strengths to address their health concerns.

Second, we noticed a lack of patient-driven solutions to addressing disparities and inequities in outcomes. While equipping patients with self-advocacy skills cannot overcome the intertwined systems that perpetuate health inequities, there are ways in which patients can actively assert themselves to address challenges in their healthcare and social support networks.

We encourage others – by engaging in our article – to explore the concepts of self-advocacy, critique and refine this framework, and ultimately develop evidence-based ways to support individuals in achieving the goals of patient-centered care.

Updated ANS Author’s Guide: Anti-racist Guidelines


The recent spotlight on police brutality and killing of Black Americans prompted widespread reflection and change toward social justice and racial inequities in almost all sectors of society – including the realm of scholarly publishing. The “Scholarly Kitchen,” blog of the Society for Scholarly Publishing, posted a notice of an “Antiracist Framework for Scholarly Publishing” on August 6, 2020 that serves as a guide to re-shape policies and practices in the production of scholarly literature.

I am delighted to share the outcome our initiative to examine and revise guidelines and practices for Advances in Nursing Science. As Editor, I established a workgroup of scholars of color who serve on the ANS Panel of Reviewers to take a deep dive into the journal’s “Information for Authors”. Together we created major anti-racist changes that have now gone into effect.

The changes that we made begin with a fundamental acknowledgement of the power of the published word to shape thought and power structures, and the responsibility of authors in situating their work within existing power structures:

Published scholarly works play a major role in shaping thought and power structures. We encourage authors to include a standpoint statement that describes your position relative to power relations of race, gender, and class. This is particularly important if your work involves disadvantaged populations or issues of social determinants of health and health equity. Examples include: 

  • “The authors Identify as white middle-class nurses. We have drawn on literature authored by scholars of color to inform the design, interpretations and conclusions reported in this article.”
  • “Our work arises from our experiences as able-bodied nurses, as well as our identities as mixed-race descendants of immigrants from Central and South American countries.”

The following is a new section that specifically addresses guidelines related to racism:

The ANS leadership – Editor, advisory board members, peer reviewers and Publisher recognize that published scholarly works are vehicles that can challenge systemic racism and intersecting forms of power inequities.  ANS expects an explicit antiracist stance as a means to provide scholarly resources to support antiracism in research, practice, education, administration, and policymaking. To this end, we offer the following guidelines:

  • Remain mindful of the many ways in which white privilege is embedded in scholarly writing, and engage in careful rereading of your work to shift away from these explicit and implied messages.  As an example, general “norms” are typically taken to reflect white experience only; this is revealed when the experience of people of color are taken to be “other” or “unusual” or worse yet “unhealthy” 
  • When race is included as a research variable or a theoretical concept, racism  must be named and integrated with other intersecting forms of oppression such as gender, sexuality, income, and religion.
  • If your work does include race,
    • Provide a rationale that clearly supports an antiracist stance.
    • Be careful not to explicitly or implicitly suggest a genetic interpretation.
    • Explicitly state the benefit that your work contributes on behalf of people of color.
  • Refrain from any content that explicitly or implicitly blames the victim or that stereotypes groups of people; situate health inequities clearly in the context of systemic processes that disadvantage people of color. 
  • Focus on unveiling dynamics that sustain harmful and discriminatory systems and beliefs, and on actions that can interrupt these structural dynamics.

Please visit the complete ANS Information for Authors to review these changes. We welcome your feedback, comments and questions! Please respond below!

Deep appreciation to the following team of ANS peer reviewers who developed these guidelines:

Helene Berman, RN, Ph.D, University of Western Ontario

Mary K. Canales, Ph.D., RN, University of Wisconsin, Eau Claire

Lucy Mkandawire-Valhmu, PhD, RN (also member of Nursology.net management team)

Margaret Dexheimer Pharris, RN, PhD, FAAN, St. Catherine University (Emerita)

Bukola Oladunni Salami, RN, MN, PhD, University of Alberta

Holly Wei, PhD, RN, CPN, NEA-BC, East Caroline University

Jennifer Woo, Ph.D., CNM, WHNP, FACNM, Texas Woman’s University (also member of Nursology.net management team)

Collaboration – DNP and PhD


Our current featured article is titled “Constructing Doctoral Leadership Scholarly Role Boundaries Through Intraprofessional Nursing Education,” available for download while it is featured. The authors are Peggy Jenkins, PhD, RN; Jacqueline Jones, PhD, RN, FAAN; Alexis Koutlas, MSN, RN, NE-BC; Suzanne Courtwright, MSN, RN, PNP; Jessica Davis, FNP, AOCNP, ACHPN and Lisa Liggett, RN, MSN, CCRN. In this video, Dr. Jenkins is joined by three of her co-authors who recently completed their DNP programs, to discuss the value of DNP and PhD collaboration.

Peggy Jenkins
Jessica Davis
Alexis Koutlas
Lisa Liggett

Innovative Indigenous Research Methodology


The latest ANS featured article is titled “Symbiotic Allegory as Innovative Indigenous Research Methodology” by Barbara Charbonneau-Dahlen, PhD.  In this article Dr. Dahlen draws on her research focus describing the  experiences of Native American boarding school survivors who were victims and witnesses of abuse, with particular attention to the sustained impact of historical trauma. She provided this message for ANS readers about her background and her research focus:

Barbara Dahlen

I was born and raised in Olga, North Dakota and completed most of my childhood education in a mission boarding school in South Dakota and higher education in North Dakota. I am an enrolled member of the Pembina band of Indians. I earned my doctorate from Florida Atlantic University Christine E. Lynn College of Nursing located in Boca Raton, FL. In recognition of the scant literature that existed on the history of Native American nurses in the United States, I began a long journey of discovery in collecting data on historical trauma.  I came to focus on symbiotic allegory because I  wanted to tell  the indigenous stories in the participants own voices to allow the voice to be heard.  This methodology came with a desire to honor the story that was given to my through honoring the sacred tradition of story at the heart of the research.

Epistemic Injustice in Women’s Reproductive Healthcare


The latest ANS featured article is titled “Epistemic Injustice A Philosophical Analysis of Women’s Reproductive Health Care in a Somali-American Community”  authored by Robin Narruhn, PhD, MN, RN and Terri Clark, PhD, CNM, ARNP, RN, FACNM.  Visit the ANS website to download this article; we welcome your comments and responses to this work.  Here is a slideshow narrated by Dr. Narruhn that gives some background on this work:

Planned ANS featured topics!


As we approach the year 2020, we invite ANS readers and nursing scholars everywhere to take a look at the topics we are featuring in the next couple of years. Even though we no longer dedicate entire issues to a topic, we continue to call for articles related to topics that we believe have particular significance for nursing and healthcare.  Here is the lineup:

Methods for Nursing Knowledge Development
Vol 43:3 –  September 2020
Manuscript due date: January 15, 2020
Vol 43:3
We seek innovative approaches to knowledge development in relation to all patterns of knowing in nursing. We also welcome manuscripts that critique any methodologic approach, manuscripts that explore the philosophic, including ethical underpinnings related to the development of nursing knowledge, and manuscripts that address the critical connections between practice and knowledge development approaches.
Humanizing Precision Science
Vol 43:4 –  December 2020
Manuscript due date: April 15, 2020
Vol 43:3
One of the trends of our time is the development of “precision science” – a trend that deserves careful consideration going forward. We seek manuscripts for this issue that provides assessment, explanation, evaluation and critique of this trend in light of the underlying foundations of nursology. This featured topic intentionally calls for both rigor and creativity that provides avenues for discussion and possible new directions in the development of our discipline.
Social Influences on Health
Vol 44:1 –  March 2021
Manuscript due date: July 15, 2020
Awareness of social influences on health (often called social determinants of health) has grown in recent decades as social, political and environmental challenges have increasingly threatened the health and all it inhabitants.  For this issue we invite articles addressing specific nursing approaches related to these issues, and advances in nursing knowledge that forms a foundation for nursing’s contributions to this important area of focus.
Historical Trauma & Health
Vol 44:2 –  June 2021
Manuscript due date: October 15, 2020
Nursing has a long history of practice and scholarship related to the care of people who experience trauma of all types. However, the health effects of historical trauma only recently have begun to be conceptualized and understood as a significant determinant of health.  For this issue of ANS, we invite scholarship that addresses this important connection and provides a clear perspective founded on nursing’s fundamental values. We welcome research reports, philosophic, including ethics analysis, and exploration of theory and evidence guided practice.
Social Justice, Big Data & Health Disparities
Vol 44:3 –  September 2021
Manuscript due date: January 15, 2021
We are seeking articles that provide a social jusice lens to the emerging ways in which big data are being used , and how these approaches can inform nursing approaches to addressing health disparities. We seek in particular articles that report research, practice, education and policy informed by nursing theoretical and philosophic perspectives.
Values and Vicissitudes of Nursing Scholarship
Vol 44:4 – December 2021
Manuscript due date – April 15, 2021
The evolution of scholarship as online publishing emerged in the past 15 years now points to an urgency to be crystal clear about the standards that shape the scholarship of our discipline, affirm these standards as collective values, and that serve as guideposts for the evolution of scholarship in the future.  For this issue of ANS we welcome manuscripts that explore the values and vicissitudes on which our standards are built.  Articles can address specific areas of focus, or more broadly on underlying philosophic concerns.

General Manuscripts are welcome any time ​

Manuscripts generally relevant to the purposes of the journal are welcome at any time. The purposes of ANS are to advance the development of nursing knowledge and to promote the integration of nursing philosophies, theories and research with practice. We expect high scholarly merit and encourage innovative, cutting edge ideas that challenge prior assumptions and that present new, intellectually challenging perspectives. We seek works that speak to global sustainability and that take an intersectional approach, recognizing class, color, sexual and gender identity, and other dimensions of human experience related to health.​​

Planned ANS featured topics!


As ANS readers have noticed, we no longer devote entire issues to a specific topic, but we do announce topics to feature in each issue.  This provides a good balance between our tradition of calling forth scholarship on timely issues in nursing and health care, and an open door for the wide range of topics that nurse scholars are exploring.  Here are the topics we have planned for the next 6 issues:

Best Evidence for Nursing Practice
Vol 43:2 –  June 2020
Manuscript due date: October 15, 2019 ​
Vol 43:2
Even though the ideal of practice based on evidence has flourished over several decades, the achievement of consistently sound practice, in nursing and in other disciplines as well, still eludes even the most well-intentioned practitioners.  For this issue of ANS we seek manuscripts that explore this dilema, examing questions such as ‘what constitutes evidence?” and “what constitutes the best evidence?” We also seek manuscripts that provide exemplars of best evidence and best practices. 

Methods for Nursing Knowledge Development
Vol 43:3 –  September 2020
Manuscript due date: January 15, 2020
Vol 43:3
We seek innovative approaches to knowledge development in relation to all patterns of knowing in nursing. We also welcome manuscripts that critique any methodologic approach, manuscripts that explore the philosophic, including ethical underpinnings related to the development of nursing knowledge, and manuscripts that address the critical connections between practice and knowledge development approaches.
Humanizing Precision Science
Vol 43:4 –  December 2020
Manuscript due date: April 15, 2020
Vol 43:3
One of the trends of our time is the development of “precision science” – a trend that deserves careful consideration going forward. We seek manuscripts for this issue that provides assessment, explanation, evaluation and critique of this trend in light of the underlying foundations of nursology. This featured topic intentionally calls for both rigor and creativity that provides avenues for discussion and possible new directions in the development of our discipline.
Social Influences on Health
Vol 44:1 –  March 2021
Manuscript due date: July 15, 2020
Awareness of social influences on health (often called social determinants of health) has grown in recent decades as social, political and environmental challenges have increasingly threatened the health and all it inhabitants.  For this issue we invite articles addressing specific nursing approaches related to these issues, and advances in nursing knowledge that forms a foundation for nursing’s contributions to this important area of focus.
Historical Trauma & Health
Vol 44:2 –  June 2021
Manuscript due date: October 15, 2020
Nursing has a long history of practice and scholarship related to the care of people who experience trauma of all types. However, the health effects of historical trauma only recently have begun to be conceptualized and understood as a significant determinant of health.  For this issue of ANS, we invite scholarship that addresses this important connection and provides a clear perspective founded on nursing’s fundamental values. We welcome research reports, philosophic, including ethics analysis, and exploration of theory and evidence guided practice.
%d bloggers like this: