Background A study aimed at reducing the time spent on the phone obtaining insurance preauthorisation in a neurosurgical clinic was successfully completed. However, the researchers were unable to reject the null hypothesis because of a combination of chronological bias and the Hawthorne effect.
Aim To increase nurse researchers’ awareness of the potential to introduce a chronological bias as a confounder in clinical research and suggest potential alternative approaches to study design.
Discussion The researcher shared the study’s purpose, design and outcome measure with the participants before collecting the baseline data. This enabled the participants to alter their practice before the intervention was implemented (a chronological bias) and change their behaviour surrounding the outcome (the Hawthorne effect).
Conclusion The use of the Delphi method became a catalyst for change before the collection of baseline data, the combination of chronological bias and the Hawthorne effect affecting the study’s results.
Implications for practice Nurse researchers seeking to improve practice should collect baseline data before informing participants and consider the risks and benefits of blinding (concealment) surrounding the outcome.
Nurse Researcher. 29, 1, 9-13. doi: 10.7748/nr.2020.e1742Correspondence
This article has been subject to external double-blind peer review and has been checked for plagiarism using automated softwareConflict of interest
To reuse this article or for information about reprints and permissions, please contact email@example.comWrite for us
For information about writing for RCNi journals, contact firstname.lastname@example.org
For author guidelines, go to rcni.com/write-for-nurse-researcher
Alternatively, you can purchase access to this article for the next seven days. Buy now