Non-conventional technologies for data collection in Brazilian
               dissertations and theses

Salvador, Pétala Tuani Candido de Oliveira; Rodrigues, Cláudia Cristiane Filgueira Martins; Lima, Kálya Yasmine Nunes de; Alves, Kisna Yasmin Andrade; Santos, Viviane Euzébia Pereira

doi:10.1590/0034-7167.2015680212i

Acessibilidade / Reportar erro

Brasil

Revista Brasileira de Enfermagem

Español English

Brasil

Español English

sumário « anterior atual seguinte »

Sumário

RESEARCH • Rev Bras Enferm 68 (2) • Mar-Apr 2015 • https://doi.org/10.1590/0034-7167.2015680212i copy

Non-conventional technologies for data collection in Brazilian dissertations and theses

Authorship Authorship Authorship Authorship Authorship SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

ABSTRACT

Objective:

to characterize non-conventional technologies used for data collection of dissertations and theses available in the Catalog of Theses and Dissertations (CEPEn) of the Brazilian Nursing Association (ABEn).

Method:

this is a documentary research, whose data were collected in the catalogs of theses and dissertations available at the ABEn website, from Volumes XIX to XXI. The indicators collected were: academic level; educational institution; year; qualification of the author; setting; non-conventional technology used; type of technology; association with conventional techniques; methodological design; benefi ts and methodological limitations.

Results:

from a total of 6346 studies, only 121 (1.91%) used non-conventional technologies for data collection, representing the fi nal sample of the study.

Conclusion:

it is concluded that Brazilian Nursing researches still need methodological innovations for data collection.

Key words:
Nursing Research; Innovation; Technology; Investigative Techniques

Volume	Total of studies^* * Number of abstracts of the volumes.		Pre-selected studies^ As inclusion criteria		Selected studies^* ***** As inclusion and exclusion criteria		Final sample
Volume	n	%	n	%	n	%	n	%
XIX	460	7,25	7	3,65	1	0,71	0	0,00
XX	280	4,41	7	3,65	0	0,00	0	0,00
XXI	285	4,49	6	3,13	2	1,43	2	1,65
XXII	318	5,01	3	1,56	4	2,86	8	6,61
XXIII	383	6,06	23	11,98	8	5,71	0	0,00
XXIV	554	8,73	26	13,54	16	11,43	12	9,92
XXV	518	8,16	24	12,50	23	16,43	20	16,53
XXVI	445	7,01	24	12,50	23	16,43	19	15,71
XXVII	482	7,60	22	11,46	20	14,29	20	16,53
XXVIII	368	7,80	6	3,13	6	4,29	6	4,96
XXIX	547	8,62	8	4,17	8	5,71	8	6,61
XXX	900	14,18	17	8,85	14	10,00	13	10,74
XXXI	806	10,68	19	9,88	15	10,71	13	10,74
Total	6346	100	192	100	140	100	121	100,00

Non-conventional Technology – n; %^* * Percentages calculated according to the total sample of studies (N=121).	Benefíts	Limitations
Audiovisual resources – 44; 36.36	Photography: offers strong descriptive data; allows clear meanings; strengthens trust relationship with researcher (provide camera).	Photography: invasion of privacy; cost; time spent; difficulty in interpreting the data; not consistent with the reality of the subjects (fear and insecurity to handle camera).
Photography – 14; 11.57	Filming: repeated exposure (increases the possibility of analysis and understanding of the observer).	Filming: stand still camera can capture only one angle; filmed subjects present themselves anxious and fear.
Cutting and pasting – 13; 10.74
Draw – 12; 9.92
Filming – 9; 7.44
Movie – 2; 1.65
Dinamics – 33; 27.27	Collective knowledge production; ease of socializing experiences and subjectivities; expression of difficult socialization topic; valuing individuals (co-researchers); therapeutic nature of artistic resources.	Difficulty of assembling group; density of the collected data.
Sensible Creative Method – 25; 20.66
Product Development – 24; 19.83	Virtual Learning Environment (VLE): active participation of students; dynamic teaching; collaborative learning; multisensory learning; evaluation at different moments and dimensions; greater motivation and commitment of students.	VLE: ability of students and precarious computer labs.
VLE – 6; 4.96	Distance Education Course (DEC): greater flexibility and transposition of barriers.
Instruments – 5; 4.13
Educative materials – 4; 3.31
DEC – 4; 3.31
Computerized system – 4; 3.31		Validation of tools: complex process; difficulty of recruiting experts.
Artefact – 1; 0.83		Computerized system: time spent; need for a team of experts; need for updates and continuous tests.
Mapping technologies – 16; 13.22	Genogram: facilitates the treatment plan; better interviewer-interviewee interaction; represents a change of options.	Not cited.
Genogram – 11; 9.10
Ecomap – 9; 7.44
Georeferencing – 4; 3.31
Familiogram – 1; 0.83	Ecomap: allows objective visualization of the family support network.
Flowchart analyzer – 1; 0.83	Georeferencing: allows another researcher to geographically locate a specific geographic coordinate.
Interview with technological tool – 9; 7.44	Transposition of barriers, possibility of reaching heterogeneous samples.	Telephone survey: missing calls (sample losses).
Telephone survey – 5; 4.13
Google docs – 2; 1.65
Virtual Community – 1; 0.83
Blog – 1; 0.83		Google docs: difficulty of participants adherence.
Performing Arts – 5; 4.13	Contribution to the subjective expression of the subjects; encouragement to reflection; suitability for the child audience.	Difficulty of assembling group; density of the collected data.
Performing Arts – 5; 4.13	Contribution to the subjective expression of the subjects; encouragement of reflection; suitability for the child audience.	Difficulty of assembling group; density of the collected data.
Painting – 3; 2.48
Modeling – 2.48
Music – 3; 2.48	Contribution to the subjective expression of the subjects; encouragement of reflection.	Difficulty of assembling group; density of the collected data.
Educational technologies – 2; 1.65	Keeping with the problem-based education; construction of knowledge according to pace and learning style of students.	Not cited.
Conceptual Maps – 1; 0.83
Games– 1; 0.83

Methodological design	Type of technology – n; %	Object of study – n; %	Objetive (n)^* * Verbs were extracted from the general objective of the study analyzed.
Bibliografic (N=0)	Light – 0; 0.00	Teaching – 0; 0.00	No studies.
	Light-hard – 0; 0.00	Research – 0; 0.00
	Hard – 0; 0.00	Management – 0; 0.00
	Total – 0; 0.00	Assistential practices – 0; 0.00
		Total – 0; 0.00
Descriptive (N=89)	Light – 21; 23.60	Teaching – 2; 2.25	To understand (16), to describe (14), to analyze (13), to identify (13), to know (9), to learn (5), to characterize (3), to unveil (3), to investigate (3), to assess (1), toverify (1), to discuss (1), to reflect (1), to rethink (1), to dimension (1), to develop (1), to estimate (1), to provide (1), to evaluate (1)
	Light-hard– 38; 42.70	Research – 32; 35.96
	Hard – 30; 33.70	Management – 0; 0.00
	Total – 89; 100	Assistential practices – 55; 61.79
		Total – 89; 100
Experimental (N=2)	Light – 0; 0.00	Teaching –2; 100.00	To develop (1), to compare (1)
	Light-hard – 1; 50.00	Research – 0; 0.00
	Hard – 1; 50.00	Manager – 0; 0.00
	Total – 2; 100	Assistential practices – 0; 0.00
		Total – 2; 100
Exploratory (N=30)	Light – 1; 3.33	Teaching – 21; 70.00	To develop (10), to build (4), to elaborate (3), to identify (2), to assess (2), to investigate (1), to analyze (1), to validate (1), to unveil (1), to implement (1), to plan (1), to structure (1), to contribute (1), to verify (1)
	Light-hard– 14; 46.67	Research – 1; 3.33
	Hard – 15; 50.00	Management – 0; 0.00
	Total – 30; 100	Assistential practices – 8; 26.67
		Total – 30; 100

Associação Brasileira de Enfermagem SGA Norte Quadra 603 Conj. "B" - Av. L2 Norte 70830-102 Brasília, DF, Brasil, Tel.: (55 61) 3226-0653, Fax: (55 61) 3225-4473 - Brasília - DF - Brazil
E-mail: reben@abennacional.org.br

Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS

[1] CORRESPONDING AUTHOR: Pétala Tuani Candido de Oliveira Salvador E-mail: petalatuani@hotmail.com