phd in nursing ethics

Doctoral – PhD in Nursing

About the Program

Georgetown’s PhD in Nursing Program is designed to be a full-time, campus-based, premier doctoral program for individuals who want to be leaders for change by seeking to advance the discipline and those they serve in academic, community health, health care, policy, global, and research settings.

Georgetown’s PhD program will lead in creating nurse scientists who generate knowledge with ethics and health equity as its core compass, to advance health, appreciating our shared humanity. Roberta Waite , Dean of Georgetown University School of Nursin g

Program Features

• Draws upon the interdisciplinary and intellectual richness of the campus community
• Develops leaders for change in nursing
• Focus in ethics and health equity
• Intellectual vibrancy with renowned faculty across multiple disciplines
• Globally known, values-based academic community
• Intellectual vibrancy across complimentary academic disciplines such as ethics, law, philosophy, medicine, and policy.
• Full-time, campus-based program

Program Questions

Please direct questions about the PhD in Nursing program to [email protected] .

• Cynda Hylton Rushton, PhD, RN
• Johns Hopkins Berman Institute of Bioethics
• Fellows/Students
• Advisory Board
• Anne and George L. Bunting Professor of Clinical Ethics Berman Institute of Bioethics Johns Hopkins School of Nursing
• Professor Dept. of Pediatrics, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine

Dr. Cynda Hylton Rushton, an international leader in bioethics and nursing, is the Anne and George L. Bunting Professor of Clinical Ethics at the Johns Hopkins Berman Institute of Bioethics and the School of Nursing, and co-chairs the Johns Hopkins Hospital’s Ethics Committee and Consultation Service.

A founding member of the Berman Institute, she co-led the first National Nursing Ethics Summit that produced a Blueprint for 21st Century Nursing Ethics. In 2016, she co-led a national collaborative State of the Science Initiative: Transforming Moral Distress into Moral Resilience in Nursing and co-chaired the American Nurses Association professional issues panel that created A Call to Action: Exploring Moral Resilience Toward a Culture of Ethical Practice. She was a member of the National Academies of Medicine, Science and Engineering Committee that produced the report: Taking Action Against Clinician Burnout: A Systems Approach to Professional Well-being . She was a member of the American Nurses Association Center for Ethics & Human Rights Ethics Advisory Board and American Nurses Foundation Well-Being Initiative Advisory Board.

Dr. Rushton is the chief synergy strategist for Maryland’s R 3 Resilient Nurses Initiative, a statewide initiative to build resilience and ethical practice in nursing students and novice nurses.  She is co-creator of the Mindful Ethical Practice and Resilience Academy (MEPRA). She serves on the Nursing Advisory Board for Corporate Counseling Associates. Dr. Rushton is a Hastings Center Fellow, Past-Chair of the Hastings Center Fellows Council, and Trustee Emeritus and a Fellow of the American Academy of Nursing. The recipient of many awards, she received the Marguerite Rodgers Kinney Distinguished Career Award and the Distinguished Researcher award from American Association of Critical Care Nurses. She is the editor and author of Moral Resilience: Transforming Moral Suffering in Healthcare and co-creator of the Rushton Moral Resilience Scale (RMRS).

Dr. Rushton’s seminal work on nurse suffering and moral distress was selected for inclusion in the U.S. Nursing Ethics History project chronicling the evolution of nursing ethics in the United States. As part of her RWJ Fellowship, she also tested an intervention to reduce moral distress and burnout by cultivating resilience in nurses working in critical care, oncology and neonatal/pediatrics.  Dr. Rushton is currently designing, implementing and evaluating the Mindful Ethical Practice and Resilience Academy (MEPRA) to build moral resilience in novice nurses.  Her forthcoming book, Moral Resilience: Transforming Moral Suffering in Health Care, to be published by Oxford University Press aims to transform current approaches for addressing moral distress by focusing on innovative methods to cultivate moral resilience and designing a culture in health care that supports ethical practice.

Dr. Rushton is also an internationally recognized expert in ethics and palliative and end-of-life care. In 2001, she received the American Association of Critical-Care Nurses Pioneering Spirit Award for her work in advancing palliative care across the life-span.  Dr. Rushton was appointed by Maryland’s governor as the first chair of the State Council on Quality Care at the End-of-Life and served from 2002-2008. She has provided leadership to a variety of national projects focusing on palliative and end-of-life care, including the National Nursing Academy on Palliative and End-of-Life Care Open Society Institute (PDIA), an innovative, experiential interdisciplinary communication training model (HRSA), the Initiative for Pediatric Palliative Care (IPPC) a research, education and quality improvement project, the End of Life Nursing Education Consortium (ELNEC) and the Upaya Institute’s Being With Dying Professional training program.  Dr. Rushton served as a member of the Institute of Medicine’s Committee on Increasing Organ Donation and as a consultant to the IOM’s project “When Children Die.” She also served on the board of directors of the Coalition to Transform Advanced Care (CTAC). She led (with Dr. Gail Geller) an international collaboration to improve the lives of children affected by life-threatening neuromuscular diseases and a related project, focusing on the ethical issues faced by neuromuscular clinicians.

In 2008 and 2014, Dr. Rushton was honored as one of Maryland’s Top 100 Women.  She is also an American Academy of Nursing’s Edge Runner and in 2014 received the Milestone Award for Bioethics Leadership from the Centre for Health Care Ethics at Lakehead University. Dr. Rushton is a Fellow of the Hastings Center and the American Academy of Nursing.

Dr. Rushton received her Master’s of Science in Nursing, with specialization as a pediatric clinical nurse specialist, from the Medical University of South Carolina. She completed her undergraduate degree in nursing at the University of Kentucky and received a doctorate in nursing at the Catholic University of America, with a concentration in bioethics. Dr. Rushton is the recipient of three post-doctoral fellowships: a Robert Wood Johnson Nurse Executive Fellowship (2006-2009), a Kornfeld Fellowship in end-of-life, ethics and palliative care (2000), and a Mind and Life Institute Fellowship in Contemplative Science (2013-2014).

Research Interests

• Moral distress and suffering of clinicians
• The development of moral resilience
• Designing a culture of ethical practice
• Conceptual foundations of integrity, respect, trust and compassion
• PhD, Catholic University of America
• MSN, Medical University of South Carolina
• BSN, University of Kentucky

Recent Publications

• Rushton, C. Swoboda, S., Reimer, T, Boyce, D., Hansen, G. (2023) The Mindful Ethical Practice & Resilience Academy (MEPRA): Sustainability of Impact. American Journal of Critical Care. 32(3):184-194. doi: 10.4037/ajcc2023236. PMID: 37121900.
• Rushton, C. (2023) Do I still belong? American Nurse Journal. 18(3),48.
• ⌘Mubarak, E., Kaur, S., Hughes, M., Rushton, C., Ali, J. (2023) Emerging experiences with virtual ethics consultation: Case Studies from the United States and Malaysia. Journal of Clinical Ethics.34(1),51-57.
• Bergman, A.,Rushton, C. (2023) Overcoming stigma: Asking for and receiving mental health support. AACN Advanced Critical Care.
• *⌘Holtz, H. K., Weissinger, G. M., Swavely, D., Lynn, L., Yoder, A., Cotton, B., Adil, T., Alderfer, M., Romig, B., Neils, K., & Rushton, C. H. (2022). The Long Tail of COVID-19: Implications for the Future of Emergency Nursing.  Journal of emergency nursing , S0099-1767(22)00282-3. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jen.2022.10.006.
• ⌘Klepper, M., Clark, K. D., Bosse, J. D., Kerbyson, M., Roy, E., & Rushton, C. H. (2022). State-level anti-transgender policies in conflict with core principles of nursing: An educator call to action.  Nurse education today ,  119 , 105608. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2022.105608
• McGeehan, C., Rushton, C. (2022) Ethical Challenges and Implications of deactivating mechanical circulatory support for patients with Preserved Cognitive Function. AACN Advanced Critical Care, 33(3), pp. 289-296
• *⌘Veenema, TG., Meyer, D, Rushton,C., Bruns,, R. Watson,M.,  Schneider-Firestone,, S. Wiseman., R.   (2022)The COVID-19 Nursing Workforce Crisis: Implications for National Health Security Health Security, 20(3), .264-269. http://doi.org/10.1089/hs.2022.0022
• *⌘Rushton, C., Nelson, K. Antonsdottir, I., Hanson, G., Boyce, D. (2022) Perceived organizational effectiveness, moral injury, and moral resilience among nurses during the COVID-19 pandemic: Secondary analysis. Nursing Management, 53(7)12-22. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.NUMA.0000834524.01865.cc
• *⌘ D. Weissinger, G., Holtz. H, Aldi, T. Alderfer, M.,Lynn, L., Rushton, C. (2022) The Impact of Traumatic Stress, Resilience, and Threats to Core Values on Nurses during a Pandemic. Journal of Nursing Administration. 52(10). 525-535. doi:10.1097/NNA.0000000000001194
• Rushton, C. Boston-Leary, K. (2022) Nurses suffering in silence: Addressing stigma of mental health in nursing and healthcare. Nursing Management. 53(8):7-11. doi:10.1097/01.NUMA.0000853148.17873.77
• * ⌘ Nelson, K., Hansen, G., Boyce, D., Ley, C., Swavely, D., Reina, M., Rushton, C. (2022) Organizational Impact on Health Care Workers’ Moral Injury During COVID-19: A Mixed-Methods Analysis. Journal of Nursing Administration. 52(1).57-66
• Hughes, M. T., & Rushton, C. H. (2022). Ethics and Well-Being: The Health Professions and the COVID-19 Pandemic.  Academic Medicine:Journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges ,  97 (3S), S98–S103. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000004524
• ⌘ Schlak, A.E., Rosa. W.E., Rushton, C.H., Poghosyan, L., Root, M.C, McHugh, M.D. (2022). An expanded institutional and national-level blueprint to address nurse burnout and moral suffering. Nursing Management, 53 (1), 1. doi: 10.1097/01.NUMA.0000816956.46367.71
• Rushton, C. (2022) Harnessing our anger in constructive ways. American Nurse Journal. P.55.  https://myamericannurse.com/Digital/January_2022/#page=57
• Rushton CH, Wood LJ, Grimley K, Mansfield J, Jacobs B, Wolf JA. Rebuilding a foundation of trust (2021) A call to action in creating a safe environment for everyone. Patient Experience Journal. 8(3):5-12. doi: 10.35680/2372-0247.1651.
• Brenner, M.J., Boothman, R.C,.,Rushton, C.H. Bradford, C. R., Hickson, G.B. (2021) Honesty and Transparency, Indispensable to the Clinical Mission – Part I : How Tiered Professionalism Interventions Support Teamwork and Prevent Adverse Events. Otolaryngologic Clinics of North America. 55(1) 43-61.   https://doi.org/10.1016/j.otc.2021.07.016
• Brenner, M., Hickson, G.B. Boothman, R. C., Rushton, C.H. Bradford, C. R.(2021) Honest and Transparency, Indispensable to the Clinical Mission –  Part II : How Communication-and-Resolution Programs Promote Patient Safety and Trust. Otolaryngologic Clinics of North America. 55(1), 63-82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.otc.2021.07.01
• Brenner, M., Hickson, G.B. Boothman, R.C., Rushton, C.H. Bradford, C. R.(2021). Honesty and Transparency, Indispensable to the Clinical Mission –  Part III :   How Leaders Can Prevent Burnout, Foster Wellness and Recovery, and Instill Resilience. Otolaryngologic Clinics of North America. 55(1), 83-103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.otc.2021.08.004
• * ⌘ Spilg, E., Rushton, C. Phillips, J., Kendzerska, T., Saad, M.,Gifford, W., Gautam, M.,  Bhatla, R., Edwards, J.,Quilty, L., Leveille, C,  Robillar d , R. (2022)  The new frontline: Exploring the links between moral distress, moral resilience, and mental health in healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic, BMC Psychiatry. 2022) 22(19), 1-12.    https://doi.org/10.1186/s12888-021-03637-w
• *⌘Koirala, B., Davidson, P. M., & Rushton, C. H. (2022). Ethics in nursing: Progress on national nursing ethics summit.  Nursing outlook ,  70 (1), 154–165. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.outlook.2021.08.001
• *⌘ Rushton, C. H., Thomas, T., Antonsdottir, I., Nelson, K, Boyce, D., Vioral, A., Swavley, D., Ley, C., Hanson, G. (2021) Moral Injury, Ethical Concerns and Moral Resilience in Health Care Workers during COVID-19 Pandemic, Journal of Palliative Medicine, 25(5), 712-719 h ttps://doi.org/10.1089/jpm.2021.0076
• Nelson, K. E., & Rushton, C. H. (2021). Working While Ill During COVID-19: Ethics, Guilt, and Moral Community.  AACN advanced critical care ,  32 (3), 356–361. https://doi.org/10.4037/aacnacc2021342
• ⌘Hughes, V., Cologer, S., Swoboda, S., & Rushton, C. (2021).  Strengthening Internal Resources to Promote Resilience Among Prelicensure Nursing Students. Journal of Professional Nursing. 37(4), 777-783.
• ⌘Ehmann, M. R., Zink, E. K., Levin, A. B., Suarez, J. I., Belcher, H., Daugherty Biddison, E. L., Doberman, D. J., D’Souza, K., Fine, D. M., Garibaldi, B. T., Gehrie, E. A., Golden, S. H., Gurses, A. P., Hill, P. M., Hughes, M. T., Kahn, J. P., Koch, C. G., Marx, J. J., Meisenberg, B. R., Natterman, J., … Kachalia, A. (2021). Operational Recommendations for Scarce Resource Allocation in a Public Health Crisis.  Chest ,  159 (3), 1076–1083. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chest.2020.09.246
• Rushton C. H. (2021). Preserving Integrity and Staying Power as a Nurse in a Pandemic.  The American Journal of Nursing ,  121 (3), 68–69. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.NAJ.0000737332.30793.91
• *⌘Thomas, T. A., Davis, F. D., Kumar, S., Thammasitboon, S., & Rushton, C. H. (2021). COVID-19 and Moral Distress: A Pediatric Critical Care Survey.  American journal of critical care: e1–e19. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.4037/ajcc2021999
• *⌘Antonsdottir, I., Rushton, C. H., Nelson, K. E., Heinze, K. E., Swoboda, S. M., & Hanson, G. C. (2021). Burnout and moral resilience in interdisciplinary healthcare professionals. Journal of Clinical Nursing.  00, 1-13.   https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.15896
• ⌘Rosa, W.E.,Buck, H.G., Squires, A.P., Kozachik, S.L., Abu-Saad Huijer, H., Bakitas, M., McGowan Boit, J., Bradley, P.K., Cacchione, P.Z., Chan, G., Crisp, N., Dahlin, C., Daoust, P., Davidson, P.M., Davis, S., Doumit, M.A.A., Fink, R.M., Herr, K.A., Hinds, P.S., Hughes, T.L., Karanja, V., Kenny, D.J., King, C.R., Klopper, H.C., Knebel, A.R., Kurth, A.E., Madigan, E.A., Malloy, P., Matzo, M., Mazanec, P., Meghani, S.H., Monroe, T.B., Moreland, P.J., Paice, J.A., Phillips, J.C., Rushton, C.H., Shamian, J., Shattell, M., Snethen, J., Ulrich, C.M., Wholihan, D., Wocial, L.D., & Ferrell, B.R. (in press). American Academy of Nursing Expert Panel consensus statement on nursing’s roles in ensuring universal palliative care access.  Nursing Outlook.
• ⌘Rosa, W.E.,Buck, H.G., Squires, A.P., Kozachik, S.L., Abu-Saad Huijer, H., Bakitas, M., McGowan Boit, J., Bradley, P.K., Cacchione, P.Z., Chan, G., Crisp, N., Dahlin, C., Daoust, P., Davidson, P.M., Davis, S., Doumit, M.A.A., Fink, R.M., Herr, K.A., Hinds, P.S., Hughes, T.L., Karanja, V., Kenny, D.J., King, C.R., Klopper, H.C., Knebel, A.R., Kurth, A.E., Madigan, E.A., Malloy, P., Matzo, M., Mazanec, P., Meghani, S.H., Monroe, T.B., Moreland, P.J., Paice, J.A., Phillips, J.C., Rushton, C.H., Shamian, J., Shattell, M., Snethen, J., Ulrich, C.M., Wholihan, D., Wocial, L.D., & Ferrell, B.R. (in press). International consensus-based policy recommendations to advance universal palliative care access from the American Academy of Nursing Expert Panels.  Nursing Outlook.
• Madara, J., S. Miyamoto, J. E. Farley, M. Gong, M. Gorham, H. Humphrey, M. Irons, A. Mehrotra, J. Resneck Jr., C. Rushton, and T. Shanafelt. (2021). Clinicians and Professional Societies COVID-19 Impact Assessment: Lessons Learned and Compelling Needs.  NAM Perspectives. Discussion Paper, National Academy of Medicine, Washington, DC.  https://doi.org/10.31478/202105b
• * ⌘ Miles, A., Rushton, C., Wise, B., Moore, A., Boss, R. (2021) Pediatric chronic critical illness, prolonged ICU admissions and clinician distress. Journal of Pediatric Intensive Care. https://doi.org/ 10.1055/s-0041-1724098.
• ⌘Braxton, J., Busse, E., Rushton, C. (2021) Mapping the terrain of moral suffering. Perspectives in Biology and Medicine,  64 (2), 235-245.
• *⌘Rushton, C. Swoboda, S., Reller, N. Skrupski, K., Prizzi, M., Young, P., Hanson, G. (2021) Mindful Ethical Practice and Resilience Academy: Equipping Nurses to Address Ethical Challenges, American Journal of Critical Care. 30(1), e1-e11.
• Rushton, C. Turner, K., Brock, R., Braxton, J. (2021) The invisible moral wounds of the pandemic: Are we experiencing moral injury? AACN Advanced Critical Care.35(1), 119-125.
• *⌘ Heinze, K. E., Hanson, G., Holtz, H., Swoboda, S. M., & Rushton, C. H. (2021). Measuring Health Care Interprofessionals’ Moral Resilience: Validation of the Rushton Moral Resilience Scale.  Journal of palliative medicine ,  24 (6), 865–872. https://doi.org/10.1089/jpm.2020.0328
• *⌘Robillard, R., Saad, M., Edwards, J., Solomonova, E., Pennestri, M. H., Daros, A., Veissière, S., Quilty, L., Dion, K., Nixon, A., Phillips, J., Bhatla, R., Spilg, E., Godbout, R., Yazji, B., Rushton, C., Gifford, W. A., Gautam, M., Boafo, A., Swartz, R., … Kendzerska, T. (2020). Social, financial and psychological stress during an emerging pandemic: observations from a population survey in the acute phase of COVID-19.  BMJ open ,  10 (12), e043805. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-043805
• ⌘ Galiatsatos, P., Kachalia, A., Belcher, H., Hughes, M. T., Kahn, J., Rushton, C. H., Suarez, J. I., Biddison, L. D., & Golden, S. H. (2020). Health equity and distributive justice considerations in critical care resource allocation.  The Lancet. Respiratory medicine ,  8 (8), 758–760. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2213-2600(20)30277-0
• ⌘Pandian, V., Morris, L. L., Brodsky, M. B., Lynch, J., Walsh, B., Rushton, C., Phillips, J., Rahman, A., DeRose, T., Lambe, L., Lami, L., Man Wu, S. P., Garza, F. P., Maiani, S., Zavalis, A., Okusanya, K. A., Palmieri, P. A., McGrath, B. A., Pelosi, P., Sole, M. L., Davidson, P., & Brenner, M. J. (2020). Critical Care Guidance for Tracheostomy Care During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Global, Multidisciplinary Approach.  Am J Crit Care , e1-e12.  https://doi.org/10.4037/ajcc2020561
• Rushton, C., Reller, N., Swoboda, S. (2020) Applying E-PAUSE to Ethical Challenges in a Pandemic. AACN Advanced Critical Care.31(3) 334-339.
• *⌘ Feeg, V. D., Mancino, D. J., Rushton, C. H., Waligora Mendez, K. J., & Baierlein, J. (2021). Ethical Dilemmas for Nursing Students and Faculty: In Their Own Voices.  Nursing education perspectives ,  42 (1), 29–35. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.NEP.0000000000000730
• ⌘Rushton, C. & Thompson, L. (2020) Moral outrage: Promise or peril. Nursing Outlook. 68(5), P536-538. DOI:  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.outlook.2020.07.006
• ⌘Ulrich, C., Rushton, C., Grady, C. (2020) Nurses confronting the Coronavirus: Challenges met and lessons learned to date. Nursing Outlook. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.outlook.2020.08.
• Rushton, C. Doerries ,B, Greene J, Geller G.(2020)  In the tragedy of this pandemic, dramatic interventions can heal moral suffering.  Lancet, https://doi.org/10.1016/ S0140-6736(20)31641-X
• Gujral, H. Rushton, C., Rosa, W. (2020) Action Steps Toward a Culture of Moral Resilience in the Face of COVID-19. J Psychosoc Nurs Ment Health Serv. 58(7):2-4. PMID:  32602927, DOI:  3928/02793695-20200617-01
• ⌘Rosa, W.E, Schlak, A. E., Rushton, C. (2020) A blueprint for leadership during COVID-19: Minimizing burnout and moral distress among the nursing workforce, Nursing Management, ahead of print
• ⌘ Pappas, S. & Rushton, C. (2020) Leading the Way to Professional Well-Being, American Nurse Journal, 15(2), 28-31. https://www.myamericannurse.com/leading-the-way-to-professional-well-being/
• ⌘ Rushton, C. & Pappas, S. (2020) System recommendations to address burnout and support clinician well-being: Implications for critical care nurses. AACN’s Advanced Critical Care.31(2), 141-145.
• Rushton, C. H. &Turner, K, (2020) Suspending our agenda when confronting ethical challenges. AACN’s Advanced Critical 31(1):98-105. doi: 10.4037/aacnacc2020569.
• ⌘ Hughes, V., Delva, S., Nkimbeng, M., Spaulding, E., Turkson-Ocran, R. A., Cudjoe, J., Ford, A., Rushton, C., D’Aoust, R., & Han, H. R. (2020). Not missing the opportunity: Strategies to promote cultural humility among future nursing faculty. Journal of Professional Nursing,  36 (1), 28–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.profnurs.2019.06.005

Related Projects

Resources for frontline clinicians, nursing ethics for the 21st century: report of the national nursing summit.

Report of the summit meeting on Nursing Ethics for the 21st Century, seeking to change the nation’s health care culture so that it more strongly supports basic ethics principles and more effectively enables nurses to practice more ethically.

Vision of Hope

Palliative care is traditionally focused on care for the terminally ill. Through Vision of Hope, scholars at the Berman Institute are aiming to change that by bringing the principles and comfort of palliative care to pediatric patients suffering from chronic illness.

Nursing, Doctor of Philosophy

School of nursing.

The goal of the PhD program at the Johns Hopkins School of Nursing is to prepare the leaders in nursing science development. Graduates will be prepared for careers as nurse scholars to conduct research that advances the discipline of nursing, health, and health care quality. The school offers an individualized program in selected areas of research congruent with student’s area of interest and the expertise of the research faculty. A key feature of the program is an intensive mentored research experience with an active investigator who has an established program of funded research. In addition to the diverse research interests of the School of Nursing faculty, students have access to the entire Johns Hopkins University, which fosters interdisciplinary and international research projects.

Quality is the defining characteristic of academic life at Johns Hopkins and the School of Nursing. Each student completes a core curriculum and works closely with a faculty advisor to complete an individualized course of study that fulfills the student’s goals and develops the basis for a program of research. The length of the program is expected to be the equivalent of four to five years of full-time study. Students must complete the program within 7 years. The Doctor of Philosophy of Nursing (DNP) to Doctor of Philosophy Nursing (PhD) pathway* can be done in less than 4 years. 

Doctor of Nursing Practice (DNP) to Philosophy in Nursing (PhD) Pathway

This program is a full time PhD program for those who have already completed a DNP Program. Now advance your DNP project’s research from clinical implementation to scientific discovery with a PhD in Nursing from Johns Hopkins and get credit for the work you’ve already done. You may carry over 9 elective credit hours from your DNP program to the PhD program. This reduces the elective credit load to 10 instead of 19 elective credits for the PhD program. With this decreased course load the degree program can potentially be completed in 3 years based on growth from prior DNP work, but that is not a requirement of the program. Please follow the overview, requirements, sample program and learning outcomes as written for the PhD program for all aspects of the DNP to PhD pathway.

Funding for PhD Program

Qualified students interested in the PhD program may be eligible to receive tuition, JHU health insurance and stipend support through the School of Nursing. Complete information is available by contacting the PhD Program Administrator at  [email protected]  

Please Note: In the following Curriculum and Plans of Study, School of Public Health courses (PH.XXX.XXX) are offered on the quarter system and are depicted here as [credits & units] and count accordingly in each school.  The course directory for the Public Health courses (PH) is available at SPH Course Directory 

Summer Registration

PhD students register for all fall and spring semesters from matriculation to degree completion. The only exceptions are students on an approved leave of absence.

Students will register for the summer semester if they:

• take a course;
• request to complete the preliminary oral exam;
• defend their dissertation; or
• graduate (F1 Visa Students).

Students who successfully defended their dissertation within the spring semester, but who will graduate in the summer semester, are not required to register (with the exception of F1 Visa Students).

If a student is not registered for other summer coursework, registering for 1 credit of Dissertation Research is typically sufficient for the summer semester for those students planning their dissertation defense in the summer semester.

Students should work with their faculty mentor, PhD Program Director, and the Registrar’s Office to determine their appropriate student status given their activities during the semester. All students should register prior to the first day of classes in all terms.

PhD Program Research Residency Guidelines

The research residency is an important pedagogical aspect of the PhD program regardless of funding source or student status, full or part time. Students should commit to a research residency each semester – including summer - across the entire period of baseline funding from the JHSON. The purpose of the research residency requirement for the PhD program is to provide full time students with research training. The goal of the research residency is for the student to have experiences in aspects of research that will facilitate embarking on a career of research and scholarship. Given that publication is a vital outcome of any PhD program, the research residency mechanism is an ideal one from which to publish. It is important to point out that not all research training experiences will be the same.

• An average of 15 hours per week (-) should be devoted to the research residency and are covered by the program funding. Ideally, the student will be a part of a research team. Timesheets are available from the PhD Program Administrator to assist in tracking these hours. After completing the required research residency hours, students may choose to serve as an RA for additional time for compensation.
• The range of experiences may include but are not limited to: conceptualization of a study, grant writing, review of literature, data collection, data management, data analysis, preparation of manuscripts, presentations, and laboratory experiences.
• It is highly desirable that the student participates in a variety of research endeavors throughout the residency. There is benefit to be gained from spending “time at task”.
• It is important to have realistic and objective goals and outcomes to both ensure that there are meaningful research training experiences and that research training experiences are documented in the student portfolio.
• The student and mentor shall devise research training goals for full time year around research training experience as well as each semester the student is a research trainee. It is also recommended that the overall goals are reviewed each semester.
• Measurable outcomes addressing each goal should be articulated and monitored for achievement. Outcomes that are salient may include: the development of protocols, publications, presentations, and objective evidence of the above-mentioned range of experiences or other experiences that are deemed appropriate.
• The development of goals and objectives is similarly important for this research training experience.
• Evidence of a successful time away from the primary research mentor would include similar measurable outcomes as described above.
• Exceptions for this requirement can be considered on a case by case basis. Please consult with the PhD Program Director.
• Research residency hours should be proportional to the number of credit hours, e.g., 5 – 10 hour per week
• Flexibility in the requirements for part time students is important. Examples of times during which research experiences can be suggested include semester breaks, weekends, evenings, and during the summer.
• The JH requirement for two successive semesters of full time study will facilitate a similar 15 hour per week research experience during this time for part time students.

PhD Program Teaching Residency Guidelines

Every PhD Student will serve as Teaching Assistant (TA) for at least one course without compensation prior to graduation. The required TA experience will be up to 10 hours per week. After completing their required TA residency, students may choose to serve as a TA for additional courses for compensation.

The purpose of the TA experience is to advance the student’s socialization into the teaching role of the faculty member. Program Directors will determine the availability and approval of courses to count toward the TA experience. Specific learning objectives for the required TA experience will be developed by the student with input from the student’s PhD advisor and the mentoring course coordinator. Learning activities may include but are not limited to:

• Course planning and syllabus development
• Leading interactive learning exercises,
• Using of information technologies to facilitate learning
• Measuring student mastery of knowledge and skills
• Test construction and item analysis
• Assigning and grading papers
• Development of teaching strategies for a class with students of varying abilities
• Determining student grades
• Evaluating student satisfaction
• Participating in curriculum planning and evaluation meetings
• Working with others to plan and conduct an educational research project.
• Working with others to publish a paper on a course or teaching method.
• Attending a national or international nursing education conference

Students should be able to articulate how their teaching and learning philosophy is grounded in their philosophy of the human person. Other areas of critical inquiry and reflection may include theories of learning; duties of teachers and students; virtues of teachers and students; and the objective of the education of nurses at all three levels.

Students considering The Nurse Educator Certificate Option (NECO) should discuss with their advisor whether to apply one of their teaching residencies to the teaching practicum ( NR.110.543 Teaching Practicum ) which is optional within the NECO.

Evaluation: Upon completion of each assigned course, the graduate TA and the faculty of the graduate TA are expected to submit their evaluations to the Academic Program Administrator. Completed evaluations will be discussed at the PhD Curriculum Committee to monitor the quality of TA experiences and also will be shared with relevant Program Directors to be considered for future TA assignments. TAs and the respective faculty member should be encouraged to include metrics in their course evaluations to assess the effectiveness of the TA.

PhD Student Scholarly Progression

PhD students are required to achieve various milestones (see below) in progressing through the program that culminate in the dissertation. These processes serve to assure quality of the scholarship and rigor of the scientific process. Progress/milestones completed will be reviewed in year 3 to approve additional funding of tuition and stipend in year 4.

• Annual Review with advisor
• Annual Review with Dissertation Committee members
• Comprehensive Examination
• Preliminary Oral Examination
• Final Defense

Johns Hopkins University Mentoring Expectations 

Please see the new Johns Hopkins University Mentoring Expectations and the new Johns Hopkins University Policy on Mentoring Commitments for PhD Students and Faculty from the Provost's Office.

Annual Review with PhD advisor

• Conducted in the Spring semester annually as the student prepares to complete an academic year (generally late March – early May)
• Individual development plan
• NIH Biosketch /CV
• Clinical research skills checklist
• Complete online submission of progress ( student and advisor ) to release registration hold in SIS. 

Annual Review with Dissertation Committee

• Once the student has entered into candidacy, an annual meeting with the full dissertation committee is highly recommended
• A review of student progress – academically and scientifically – along with additional development opportunities should be discussed

Challenges in study implementation should be reviewed, and the committee should offer support to help the student overcome the challenge or refine the study as appropriate

PhD Comprehensive Examination

PhD  Comprehensive Exam  Application

• Students must have completed year one required nursing classes and statistics course work, totaling 24 credit hours, to sit for the Comprehensive Examination (with the exception of NR.110.827 Grant Writing and NR.110.891 Responsibilities & Activities of the Nurse Scientist , which need not be taken prior to this examination).
• Students must be registered the semester prior to the examination and have all incompletes cleared from their record in order to take the Comprehensive Examination.
• Purpose: The purpose of the written comprehensive examination is to validate the student’s ability and skills to generate, synthesize, and critically analyze knowledge relevant to the discipline of nursing. Questions related to required nursing and statistics courses are administered by the program in Canvas. 
• The examination is offered the first week of June. All students are tested on the same days.
• Students desiring to take the examination meet with their advisors to review eligibility and assure that all requirements have been met.
• With the approval of the advisor, 30 days or more before the scheduled examination, the student completes the “Comprehensive Examination Application Form” and submits it to the PhD Program Director for approval. A copy of the approval form is kept on file in the students’ personal folder in the PhD Program Director’s office.
• The PhD Program Director informs the PhD Curriculum Committee members of those students approved to take the Comprehensive Examination three weeks before the examination.
• The PhD program office shall inform those taking the examination of its time and place and shall proctor the examination.
• Students not taking the examination when scheduled due to personal reasons are not penalized and need only to reschedule.
• Part A is given on Day 1 and is to be completed in 4 hours. Part B is given on Day 2 and is to be completed in 4 hours.
• Students are required to type answers and submit exam answers via Canvas using Turnitin to the Program Administrator prior to 5p ET.
• Students may access previously assembled references and materials, but are not to access the internet for searches. The use of reference or bibliography databases (such as endnote or reference manager) is not permitted.
• Students should critically analyze and synthesize information in a logical manner, citing major authors.
• Students should structure their time to incorporate any needed breaks.
• The PhD Curriculum Committee appoints the examination committee from Program faculty. The committee includes at least three members, one member having taught in the core theory sequence and one member having taught in the core research design and methods sequence.
• The Program Director and Associate Program Director chair the 2 sections of the exam.
• The committee develops integrating questions for the examination focusing on required nursing and statistics courses. The questions should test students’ ability to synthesize nursing theory and research and statistics application.
• The grade for each question is fail, conditional pass, or pass. To pass the examination, the student must receive a pass or higher score from a majority of the examination committee on all questions. The criteria for adequate completion of the examination are intended to facilitate the judgment of the Comprehensive Examination Committee as to whether the candidate has responded adequately to the questions.
• Reflect accurate, consistent, and appropriate application of concepts to the situation presented in the question.
• Show evidence of in-depth application and synthesis of the content of the courses.
• Reflect the appropriate use of references, e.g., statistical texts for statistical issues, and peer-reviewed journal papers.
• Students are informed of their results in writing within 60 days after completion of the examination. The letter is copied to the student’s advisor, the chair of the PhD Admissions, Progression and Graduation Committee, and the Registrar’s Office. If the student fails to pass any component of the Comprehensive Exam, the letter is also copied to the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs.
• Further feedback on students’ performance may be obtained from their advisors.
• A student who fails the examination may repeat it once. The student should contact their academic advisor to discuss their academic difficulties and may be asked to write a letter to the chair of the PhD Admissions, Progression and Graduation Committee communicating any information including their plan for improvement.
• The repeat examination must be completed within one year of the original examination.
• The appeal process for grades applies to this examination.

PhD Preliminary Oral Examination

PhD Preliminary Oral Exam Form

• complete all required and elective coursework;
• have all incompletes cleared from their record;
• have completed the Johns Hopkins University Residency requirement of 2 consecutive semesters, fall and spring, full-time study; and
• be registered the semester of the examination, this includes summer semester.
• At least three of the five faculty members must be tenure track at the rank of assistant professor, associate professor, or full professor.  This may include full time or part time faculty , visiting faculty , or emeritus faculty if they also hold the titles of assistant, associate, or full professor.
• Three of the five members must be from the candidate’s home department (SON).  One of these must be at the Associate Professor level or higher.
• One (1) of the two outside faculty members must be within Johns Hopkins University, full-time tenure track holding rank of Professor, Associate Professor or Emeritus Professor who serves as Chair of the examination committee .
• One (1) committee member from any department at the University (outside of the SON) or outside of the University pending committee approval
• For DNP/PhD students, because the oral exam stands in place of the DNP exam, it is expected that the student’s DNP advisor will be a voting member of the committee.

Note: With approval, there is an option for a 6 th , non-voting member.  This option is likely to be most relevant for DNP/PhD students. 

• Purpose of Preliminary Oral Examination: The purpose of a preliminary examination is to test the depth and breadth of the student’s knowledge and reasoning abilities. The scope of such an examination cannot, nor should it be, sharply defined. The examination committee can gain a feeling for the limits of the examination by a review of the candidate’s formal course record and by knowledge of the school, group, department, or committee requirements (e.g., whether specific minor as well as major subjects are to be included). Preliminary Oral Examinations are closed to all but the candidate and examination committee members. (Students are encouraged to arrange for a “Dry Run” presentation for colleagues and faculty input prior to exam.)

     Students should refer to relevant oral examination guidelines under PhD Program Dissertation and Final Oral Examination.

• Chair Selection: The Examination Committee chair will be the most senior ranking member of the committee, at or above the level of Associate Professor within the University but outside the School of Nursing. If two members have the same ranks, the chair is the one who has been in that rank the longest. However, if the most senior member is also the student’s advisor/co-advisor, the second most senior-ranked member will be the Examination Committee chair.
• Faculty that do not have an earned Research Doctorate (e.g., DNP, MD), are not tenure-eligible (e.g., Practice-Education Track), or are from outside the University, must have Curriculum Vitae (CV) submitted to School of Nursing PhD Admissions, Progression and Graduation Committee for approval.  This approval is only required the first time they serve on a SON committee.
• Each committee may include only 1 member who is not on faculty at Johns Hopkins University. Faculty members at other institutions and adjunct faculty must be reviewed and approved by the School of Nursing PhD Admissions, Progression and Graduation Committee prior to participation in the Oral Examination.
• SON faculty members are defined as those having primary appointment in the Johns Hopkins School of Nursing or who are assigned as the Faculty advisor.

Duties of the Chair

• Preside at the examination.
• Determine the scope, character, and conduct of the examination before the questioning begins.
• Determine time allotments to inside and outside members of the committee.
• Report the results of the examination to the candidate.
• Notify the Chair, Faculty advisor and Academic Program Administrator of inability to appear at designated time.
• Participate in the examination process.
• Notify the Committee chair, faculty advisor and Academic Program Administrator of inability to appear at designated time.
• Participate in the examination process as a committee member if one of the serving members of the committee fails to appear on the date of the examination.
• Alternate members not called to serve as committee members may attend the examination if they wish to do so, but may not ask questions or vote.
• Dissertation Committee Optional Role: External Reader: An external reader is an individual with an earned research or clinical doctorate who offers additional content and/or methodological expertise but is not a regular member of the dissertation committee. Attendance at the dissertation oral examination is not required for the external reader. If in attendance, they may participate in the private portion of the exam at the discretion of the chair, but cannot vote on the outcome of the exam. In addition, the external reader may not be present during the voting.
• Length of Examination: Examination process will start with a 20-minute presentation on the topic of the student’s proposed dissertation research. The chair will ask for questions from the committee. The student will respond until all members of the committee have completed their questions. The committee will vote by private ballot on its evaluation of the examination with majority ruling. (Total examination period is expected to be about 2 hours.)
• If the candidate receives an unconditional pass (a majority of favorable votes), the committee is to be considered discharged.
• If the candidate receives a conditional pass, the removal of the condition is to be reported to the School of Nursing PhD Admissions, Progression and Graduation Committee by the chair in writing, after which the committee is considered discharged.
• No re-examination.
• Re-examination by the same committee.
• Re-examination in written form and conducted by the same committee.
• Re-examination by a new committee. If the recommendation is for a new committee, at least one outside member of the original committee shall be appointed to the new committee. The committee may recommend whatever action in its judgment seems desirable, taking into consideration the background of the student, their prior performance and future potential, and reactions to oral questioning. The School of Nursing PhD Admissions, Progression and Graduation Committee will be guided by these recommendations and will assume responsibility for whatever actions are taken. Stipulations and/or Re-examination: If there is a recommendation for re-examination, the examination can be repeated once, but only once, and must be repeated within one calendar year. The committee may also make recommendations for the conduct of the proposed research that do not affect the outcome of the examination; the student’s advisor will help them incorporate such recommendations into the proposal.

Faculty who do not have an earned Research Doctorate (e.g., DNP, MD), are not tenure-eligible (e.g., Practice-Education Track), or are from outside the University, must have Curriculum Vitae (CV) submitted to School of Nursing PhD Admissions, Progression and Graduation Committee for approval

Each committee may include only 1 member who is not on faculty at Johns Hopkins University. Faculty members at other institutions and adjunct faculty must be reviewed and approved by the School of Nursing PhD Admissions, Progression and Graduation Committee prior to participation in the Oral Examination. Occasionally, one adjunct or one scientist faculty member, but not both, may serve on the Committee. Neither may serve as the Chair.

SON faculty members are defined as those having primary appointment in the Johns Hopkins School of Nursing

Each committee may include only 1 member who is not on faculty at Johns Hopkins University. Faculty members at other institutions and adjunct faculty must be reviewed and approved by the School of Nursing PhD Admissions, Progression and Graduation Committee prior to participation in the Oral Examination. Occasionally, one adjunct or one scientist faculty member, but not both, may serve on the Committee. Neither may serve as the Chair. 

PhD Program Dissertation and Final Oral Examination

PhD Program Dissertation and Final Oral Examination Form

• Student status: PhD candidates in the School of Nursing must be registered for at least 3 credits per semester (not including summer, unless defending during the summer semester) after passing the preliminary oral examination until taking the final oral examination. Specifically, students are to take no less than NR.110.890 Dissertation Seminar Dissertation Seminar, 1 credit, and NR.110.899 Dissertation Dissertation Research, 2 credits, both fall and spring semester unless they are on an approved leave of absence. The student must be registered the semester prior to the examination. All students must complete all requirements for the PhD Degree within seven (7) years of matriculation (excluding any Leaves of Absence).  Nota Bene: If students are the holders of a research training grant (such as NRSA), they must also comply with the academic requirements of that award.
• Consult with the advisor regarding the composition of the Dissertation Committee.
• Procure agreement of the faculty members to serve on the Examination Committee and arrange a time suitable to all members (including alternates) at least 60 days before the exam.
• Initiates Oral Exam for the PhD Degree form to obtain approval of Dissertation Committee composition and members from the PhD Admissions, Progression, and Graduation Committee at least 60 days in advance of the exam. The Oral Exam for the PhD Degree form should be accompanied by CVs of proposed dissertation committee members meeting any of the following criteria: (a) holds a non-Research Doctorate, (b) not tenured or tenure-eligible at Johns Hopkins University, or (c) does not have a primary faculty appointment at Johns Hopkins University. Form and accompanying CV(s) should be submitted to the PhD Admissions, Progression, and Graduation Committee for approval at least 60 days in advance of the scheduled exam. Exams with forms submitted less than 60 days in advance of the scheduled exam, if approved under special circumstances, will automatically be held remotely.
• Obtains JHMIRB approval or Animal Research Committee approval (with advisor as PI of record) before initiating dissertation research.
• Executes research under the supervision of dissertation advisor.
• Keeps advisor informed of progress while conducting research, requesting meetings with advisor and Dissertation Committee members as appropriate.
• Writes the dissertation according to the “SON Guidelines for Writing the PhD Dissertation.”
• After obtaining advisor’s approval, initiates preliminary scheduling for Final Oral Examination, working with the Academic Program Administrator to coordinate program support and final scheduling.
• Submit dissertation to Dissertation Committee at least 3 weeks before anticipated Final Oral Examination.
• After approval of the dissertation, submit final version to the Sheridan Library’s Electronic Thesis & Dissertation (EDT) Program.
• Prepares a manuscript to include at least some of the results of the dissertation to be submitted to an appropriate journal before graduation.
• Purpose of Dissertation and Final Oral Examination: While the purpose of the preliminary oral examination is to test the depth and breadth of the student’s knowledge and reasoning abilities in areas germane to the dissertation, the major focus of the final oral examination is the dissertation. Questions should be relevant to or based on the dissertation research including implications of the results.
• Chair Selection: The Examination Committee chair will be the most senior ranking member of the committee, at or above the level of Associate Professor within the University but outside the School of Nursing.  If two members have the same rank, the chair is the one who has been in that rank the longest. However, if the most senior member is also the student’s advisor/co-advisor, the second most senior-ranked member will be the Examination Committee chair.
• Determine the scope, character, and conduct of the examination before the questioning begins in concert with the Dissertation Chair (advisor).
• Determine time allotments to members of the committee.
• The chair is responsible for enforcing time limits and not exceeding 2 hours in total.
• The student advisor reports the results of the examination to the PhD Program Director and the Executive Vice Dean immediately after the examination on the form provided for this purpose.
• Alternate members not called to serve as committee members may attend the examination if they wish to do so, but may not ask questions or vote. Dissertation Committee Optional Role – External Reader: An external reader is an individual with an earned research or clinical doctorate who offers additional content and/or methodological expertise but is not a regular member of the dissertation committee. Attendance at the dissertation oral examination is not required for the external reader. If in attendance, they may participate in the private portion of the exam at the discretion of the chair but cannot vote on the outcome of the exam. The external reader is not present during the voting. Length of Examination: The examination process will begin with a 30-minute public presentation followed by 30 minutes of questions from the audience (Total of 1 hour for the Public Portion). The committee then meets in private with the candidate for questions (Total Time of 2 hours for the Private Portion). The chair will ask for questions from the committee. The student will respond until all members of the committee have completed their questions. The committee will vote by private ballot on its evaluation of the examination with majority ruling (total time of exam not to exceed 3 hours).
• If the candidate receives a conditional pass, the exact terms of the condition are to be reported on the examination form, i.e., what course(s), if any, need to be taken, in what time frame the condition(s) should be met, and any other pertinent information that will point out clearly to both the student and the faculty how to satisfy the condition(s). As soon as all conditions have been met, the chair of the Examination Committee must report the removal of the condition in writing to the Doctor of Philosophy Board. The committee is then discharged. The removal of the condition is to be reported to the PhD Program Director and the Executive Vice Dean by the Dissertation Committee chair via the written “Reader’s Report,” after which the committee is considered discharged.
• Re-examination by a new committee. If the recommendation is for a new committee, at least one outside member of the original committee shall be appointed to the new committee.
• The two committee members designated by the PhD Admissions, Progression and Graduation Committee as Doctor of Philosophy Board Readers will be responsible for approving the final Readers’ Report after the student has finished all revisions. The report shall be submitted to the School of Nursing Registrar’s Office with a copy to the PhD Program Director and the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs.

Faculty who do not have an earned Research Doctorate (e.g., DNP, MD), are not tenure-eligible (e.g., Practice-Education Track), or are from outside the University, must have Curriculum Vitae (CV) submitted to School of Nursing PhD Admissions, Progression and Graduation Committee for approval.

Steps of Successful Completion of Final Oral Exam

• Make edits to the written dissertation with guidance from the advisor and committee
• Send  a copy of the final abstract and title to the Academic Program Administrator ([email protected])
• Send a copy of  CV and post-graduation plans to the Academic Program Administrator  ([email protected])
• Make sure to read the submission check list: https://www.library.jhu.edu/library-services/electronic-theses-dissertations/submission-checklist/
• Submit dissertation to the library (directions included in link above)
• Students must submit completed edits of an electronic copy of the dissertation to the Welch library and receive a receipt from the library confirming that the electronic thesis has been accepted by the deadline for the current semester when they defend. If unable to do so, they will have to register for one credit of dissertation seminar for the semester following the defense.
• Forward  a copy of the library receipt to the Academic Program Administrator ([email protected])
• The application for graduation is available online via SIS. https://sis.jhu.edu/sswf/

Dissertation Guidelines for Manuscript Format

• Integrated knowledge of field, identification of gaps in the selected science and provision of a theoretical foundation for the research

Chapters 2-4: Manuscripts 1, 2, 3

• Concise summary tying work together
• Discussion of the contribution this research makes to the related field of science (new knowledge)
• Complete list of references

Appendices (optional):

• Analysis not in manuscripts (tables, and/or narrative)
• Instruments
• Methods details not in the manuscript
• A minimum of three manuscripts ready for submission to a peer-reviewed journal
• Student must be first author
• Subject must be student’s original research
• Subject to approval of Dissertation Committee
• Literature review article
• Methodological
• Concept analysis and/or theory application
• Instrument development
• Results May also be results from three separate but related experiments
• Timing: Articles must be produced while the student is matriculated in the SON PhD Program

Example of Reference List Format

American Psychological Association (2019). Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association

(7th Ed.). Washington, DC: APA.

Gross, D., Alhusen, J., & Jennings, B.M. (2012). Authorship ethics with the dissertation manuscript option.

Research in Nursing & Health , 35, 431-434.

International Committee on Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) (2010) Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts

Submitted to Biomedical Journals , www.icmje.org/urm_main.html , Accessed on November 25, 2012.

Mangiardi J.R. & Pellegrino E.D. (1992). Collegiality: What is it? Bulletin of the New York Academy of

Medicine , 68(2), 292-296.

McCammon S.D. & Brody H. (2012). How virtue ethics informs medical professionalism. Health Education

Forum, Nov 9. [Epub ahead of print]

To comply with copyright law, it is important that you do not include journal proofs or printed articles unless you receive permission from the journal in which your work has been published. You should include the word processing format (i.e., MSWord) in the dissertation. Be sure to include the full citation for the manuscript, indicating it has been published, has been accepted for publication, or under review as appropriate.

Program Requirements

PhD students will be required to repeat a course if they earn a grade below a B (83%) for core nursing courses, and a grade below a C (73%) in non-nursing core courses. PhD students can repeat more than one course one time.

Electives can be taken through any division of Johns Hopkins University including the School of Public Health, School of Medicine, School of Engineering, and all of the Social Science Departments. Some SON elective courses are offered every other year. Please check with the Academic Program Coordinator regarding course offerings. Independent study credits do not count toward the 19 credits of electives required. Students may apply up to 6 credits of a 500 level course offering (in or outside the SON) toward their doctoral program requirements. The PhD Curriculum Committee has assigned 9 credits for the completion of the NIH Summer Genetics Institute, which may be applied to the PhD Program elective requirement.

Sample Program of Study

Electives can be taken through any division of Johns Hopkins University including the School of Public Health, School of Medicine, School of Engineering, and all of the Social Science Departments. Some SON elective courses are offered every other year. Please check with the Academic Program Coordinator regarding course offerings. Independent study credits do not count towards the 19 elective credits of electives required. Students my apply up to 6 credits of 500 level course offering (in or outside the SON) toward their doctoral program requirements. The PhD Curriculum has assigned 9 credits for the completion of the NIH Summer Genetics Institute, which may be applied to the PhD Program elective requirement.

Learning Outcomes

Upon graduation from the PhD program, students will:

• Possess knowledge and skills in theoretical, methodological, and analytic approaches that will enable them to conduct research to discover and apply knowledge in nursing science, health, and health care.
• Assume a leadership role in nursing and in the broader arena of health care both nationally and internationally.

Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)

Become a leader in nursing research.

The UW–Madison School of Nursing is a special place to pursue a PhD degree. Our PhD students have access to the vast resources of a world-class research institution, but also establish a close-knit community that fosters long-lasting, collegial relationships.

The PhD degree is intended for aspiring researchers with a bachelor of science in nursing (BSN) or master of science (MS).

Our PhD Students

• Participate in their faculty mentor’s research beginning their first semester.
• Full-time students receive tuition remission plus a monthly stipend with employment as a graduate assistant for up to four years of study.
• Lead their own research to advance nursing and improve health.
• Advance into research leadership roles at major universities, large health care systems, government, and industry.

Our PhD Program Features

• Nationally renowned faculty and award-winning senior nurse scientists.
• Individualized mentorship (2–5 students per PhD faculty mentor).
• Cutting-edge research.
• Interdisciplinary research collaborators.
• Internal Nursing Research and Sponsored Programs office that provides support for grant writing, award management, research design and statistical support, and stakeholder engagement.

The school is the preeminent nursing research institution in Wisconsin and a fundamental part of the state’s health care system. We endeavor to better lives throughout Wisconsin’s hospitals, clinics, schools, homes, and communities.

Priority Deadline: December 1, 2023

Request Information

• About Our PhD Program More
• How to Apply More
• Why Research at UW–Madison More
• Leadership & Careers More
• PhD Curriculum More
• Signature Research & Faculty Profiles More
• Compare Graduate Programs More
• Commitment to Diversity & Inclusion More
• Life in Madison More

Upcoming PhD Events

No events returned.

"The most valuable parts of my experience at UW–Madison have been the incredible mentoring and opportunities. I have been able to travel and present at national and international conferences, have received funding for a pilot study, and have attended many professional development events." — Jessica Rainbow, PhD '18

About Our PhD Program

The PhD program prepares researchers to develop, evaluate, and disseminate new knowledge in nursing and health science.

At UW–Madison, students actively engage in research early in their PhD programs. The UW–Madison campus offers opportunities for interdisciplinary training. Located near the School of Medicine and Public Health, the School of Pharmacy, and UW Hospital and Clinics, the School of Nursing is well positioned for collaboration across health care professions. Our faculty, staff, and students work together with scientists and renowned scholars across the UW–Madison campus, the nation, and the world.

Program Basics

Delivery: In person Credits: 52 Program Length: 3-5 years Tuition : Tuition remission with graduate assistantship Eligible Applicants: BSN or MS degree holders

Why Research at UW–Madison

A faculty mentor with similar research interests or methodologies will be key to your success in our PhD program. Our faculty have a wide variety of research interests and work closely with their PhD students.

Our signature research areas include:

• Aging & Care for Older Adults
• Children, Families & Reproductive Health
• Health Equity
• Health Systems & Public Health
• Mental Health & Substance Use
• Symptom Science & Palliative Care

Explore Nursing Research & Faculty

PhD Student & Alumni Testimonials

Kristin Merss PhD Student

"From the beginning UW–Madison offered me the opportunity to develop my own area of research."

Jen Stevens, PhD student

"The program emphasizes preparation for students' research. We receive amazing mentorship, which is not offered in other places."

Sarah Brzozowski, PhD’21

“This is a supportive program where there is collaboration and partnership with both faculty & other students."

View Our Current PhD Students

PhD Alumni Leadership & Careers

School of Nursing Alumna Named Dean of College of Nursing and Health Sciences at UW–Eau Claire

Dr. Kristen Abbott-Anderson, an alumna of the UW–Madison School of Nursing, was recently named the new dean of the College of Nursing and Health Sciences at the University of Wisconsin-Eau Claire.

Where Are They Now? Q&A with Treenut Pummanee, PhD'14

Treenut Pummanee, PhD'14, shares about her nursing journey, why she chose UW–Madison, and her advice for current and future nursing students.

Following Her Calling

A conversation with Sarah Brzozowski, PhD'21, who currently works as the Director of Magnet and Nursing Excellence at UW Health.

Read More Stories

PhD Curriculum

Overview & core courses.

The PhD program is in-person for students to engage in scholarly inquiry and conduct research side-by-side with faculty and peers.

Our program requires a minimum of 52 credits and is designed to be completed in 3–5 years.

Students complete core courses in the following areas:

• Scholarly Inquiry
• Theory and Practice of Nursing
• Policy and Leadership
• Nursing Education

Students must also:

• Complete a PhD minor through intentional and collaborative coursework outside of nursing.
• Participate in research groups or guided research experiences, and an independent dissertation study.

View  Sample PhD Programs  and  PhD Student Learning Outcomes .

This is an accordion element with a series of buttons that open and close related content panels.

Scholarly Inquiry: 18 credits min

N803 and N804 Advanced Research Design and Methods I & II (6 credits):  The focus of these courses is on nursing and health related research traditions, the relationship between research paradigms and research designs and how various research designs have been used by nurse researchers. Both quantitative and qualitative methods and approaches will be examined.

N815 Knowledge Development in Nursing (3 credits):  Examination of the history of the discipline of nursing, with emphasis on the evolution of debates regarding what is known and how it is known.

N816 Proseminar in Nursing Research (1 credit): Two semesters are required; one in the first year of doctoral study and one as the student is nearing completion of coursework (Year 3). This seminar focuses on professional development and socialization to the role of nurse scientist. Topics emphasize development of career paths that will lead to productive research, scholarly publication/presentation, master teaching, and academic leadership. Discussion includes current topics in nursing research, especially as illustrated by the planned and ongoing research of graduate students and faculty in nursing.

N802 Ethics and the Responsible Conduct of Research (1 credit):  Ethical issues in the design, conduct, and reporting of research are examined in the context of the nature of the scientific endeavor, the structure of the research community, and professional and federal guidelines for supporting scientific integrity and controlling misconduct.

Advanced Methods/Statistics (6 credits)

Policy & Leadership: 3-9 credits min

N703 Health Care and Public Policy (3 credits)

N817 Research in Communities, Populations, and Systems (3 credits):  Students will examine concepts and methods of research directed toward health of communities, populations, and systems. The course provides a foundation for future research.

N847 Policy and Leadership Practicum (3 credits):  Students will engage as participants and observers in varied public policy agencies that correspond to their research problems or populations of interest. The focus will be on examining how a particular set of policies can influence the health of individuals or a given population.

N817 and N847 are required if students select this area of emphasis.

Theory & Practice of Nursing: 3-9 credits min

A Population or Phenomenon Course

N590 Contemporary Practices in Nursing – Various Special Topics (1-3 credits)

N702 Health Promotion and Disease  Prevention in Diverse Communities (3 credits):  Health promotion and disease prevention interventions are examined for populations, incorporating multidisciplinary approaches. Focuses on developing increased knowledge, appreciation, and skills for health promotion and disease prevention among diverse communities. Addresses epidemiological, individual, socio-economic, and environmental factors related to health status.

N722 Advanced Practice Nursing Theory: Adults and Older Adults (3 credits):  This course will examine theoretical perspectives and evidence-based approaches to human responses to health and illness during adulthood and old age. Concepts and research from multiple disciplines will be examined as a framework for reflective practice with adults.

N741 Advanced Practice Nursing Theory: Family Process & Child Development (3 credits):  Analyzes selected family and child development theories and research that inform advanced practice nursing. Applies these concepts to assess child and family needs, enhance the parent-child relationship, and develop family-centered, culturally responsive interventions in health and illness.

N751 Advanced Practice Nursing Theory: Psychiatric Mental Health (3 credits):  Analysis and integration of selected theories and models in psychotherapy, neuroscience, mental health, psychiatric disorders, and advanced psychiatric mental health nursing in complex care settings with diverse patients, communities, and populations.

N818 Patient-Centered Research (3 credits):  This course addresses conceptual and methodological perspectives in how patient-centered research is conducted from the development through the testing and implementation of interventions. Attention is given to various conceptualizations of patient-centeredness, to the behavioral and physiological origins of patient-centered interventions, and to the trajectory of testing such interventions, from descriptive studies to experimental trials.

N819 Clinical Field Practicum (3 credits):  Students will engage as participants and observers in clinical or other care settings that correspond to their research problems or populations of interest. The focus will be on deepening knowledge of the health problems faced by patients in the care setting, development of research questions or proposals to improve their health outcomes, and understanding facets of the environment that influence how research is implemented there.

N818 and N819 are required if students select this area of emphasis

Nursing Education: 3 credits min

Three required credits may be earned in coursework focusing on nursing education. Suggested nursing courses (but other education-focused courses may be approved) include:

N785 Foundations of Curriculum Development and Evaluation in Nursing Education (3 credits):  Examination and application of knowledge and skills related to curriculum planning, implementation and evaluation for nursing education. Emphasis on history and philosophy of nursing curricula, models of curriculum and evaluation, and strategies for change and innovation.

N786 Foundations of Teaching and Learning in Nursing (3 credits):  The focus of this course is the planning, implementing, and evaluation of teaching and learning strategies for nursing education within diverse settings and student populations.

N787 Nursing Education Practicum (1-3 credits):  Application of knowledge and skills in the nurse educator role in selected educational environments (classroom, clinical, laboratory and/or communities). Seminar component included for discussion of instructional experiences and issues.

Research/Dissertation/Group Participation: 10 credits min

N799/N999/N990: Guided research, dissertation work, and participation in their faculty mentor’s research group (or another research group agreed upon with the mentor) each semester.

PhD Minor: 9 credits min

The purpose of the minor is to add breadth to a PhD major. Two minor options are available.

The Option A minor requires a minimum of 9 credits in a single department/major field of study. Examples of Option A minors include Women’s Studies, Sociology, Educational Psychology, Prevention Science, Industrial Engineering, and Business.

The Option B minor, or distributed minor, requires a minimum of 9 credits in one or more departments and can include coursework in the School of Nursing.

There are a number of certificate programs that can be used to fulfill the minor requirement. Some examples include:

• Bioinformatics
• Consumer Health Advocacy
• Fundamentals of Clinical Research
• Gender and Women’s Studies
• Gerontology
• Global Health
• Humans and the Global Environment
• Patient Safety
• Prevention and Intervention Science
• Clinical and Community Outcomes Research

PhD Request for Information

How to apply.

• Eligibility & Prerequisites
• Costs & Aid
• Early Entry Option for Undergrads

Eligibility Requirements

• A bachelor’s degree in nursing from an accredited (CCNE or NLN) program
• Undergraduate GPA of at least 3.0 (on a 4.0 scale) on the last 60 credits of the most recent baccalaureate degree
• Three or four academic references from individuals who can speak to your scholarly activities, research capabilities, and potential for success in the doctoral program
• Two examples of original papers or other scholarly work
• Essay describing your reasons for pursuing a PhD, research interests, and career goals

English Proficiency

If your native language is not English and your undergraduate instruction was not in English, you need a minimum English proficiency test score:

• TOEFL = 580 (paper)/92 (internet-based)
• MELAB = 82 or

Please refer to the  Graduate School  for more information.

You are exempt if:

• English is the exclusive language of instruction at the undergraduate institution you attended.
• You earned a degree from a regionally accredited U.S. college or university within five years of your anticipated start date.
• Excluding ESL (English as a Second Language) courses, you have completed at least two full-time semesters of graded coursework in a U.S. college or university, or at an institution outside the U.S. where English is the exclusive language of instruction, not more than five years prior to the anticipated semester of enrollment.

Full-time students receive tuition remission, a monthly stipend, and eligibility for health insurance for the first four years of study. Students still pay segregated and other fees to the university.

Learn more about Graduate Assistant benefits and compensation rates .

All students are encouraged to apply for :

• External funding to support their training (i.e., NRSA and similar fellowships).
• Internal funding for graduate assistants.

Our program requires a minimum of 52 credits and can be completed in 3–4 years. Graduate school cost of attendance is based on a nine-month period.

Although the cost of attending UW–Madison will vary among all students, the university bases its financial aid awards on this budget:  Graduate School Cost of Attendance.

Visit the  Costs & Financial Aid  page for full information about financial support.

Submit your online application and all required application materials by the following deadlines:

• Application opens:  Early September
• Priority deadline for funding consideration:  December 1
• Deadline for Fall (international applicants only) : March 15
• Deadline for Spring:  October 1

After the priority deadlines, completed applications will be considered for admission and financial awards as available.

Once you have submitted your application, you will be able to track the Graduate School’s and the School of Nursing’s receipt of your materials through the  online status system .

When we have received all the required application materials, we give every application a complete and holistic review.

The faculty admissions committee reviews each candidate’s application and makes a recommendation about advancing to an interview. We schedule interviews with potential faculty advisors as part of the application process and can schedule online interviews for applicants.

We have limited funding to cover travel costs for the interview process. Funding for travel is decided on a first come, first serve basis.

We will continuously review completed applications from eligible candidates.

Submit these materials to the graduate school:

• UW–Madison graduate electronic application:  Complete and submit online
• Official transcripts or academic records from all institutions attended.  International academic records must be in the original language accompanied by an official English translation. Documents must be issued by the school with the official seal/stamp and an official signature. If you are currently completing a degree, you will need to provide a final transcript indicating your degree was awarded.
• Curriculum vitae or resume
• TOEFL, IELTS, or MELAB score  (international students only)
• Three or four letters of recommendation:  Provide names and contact information of references in your online application.
• If you are submitting a writing sample with multiple authors, please provide a description of your role in the writing process and which part(s) you were responsible for writing.
• What are your motives in seeking a PhD in nursing?  Include your career goals, future job/position you would like to pursue, as well as how getting a PhD in nursing could help you to meet your future goals and/or career pursuit.
• At this time, what topics or questions are you interested in studying?  Among what group or population might your area of research include? Additionally, what are your reasons for choosing your research interest and subject group?
• What research experiences have you had?  Please describe how these experiences may have prepared you for graduate school. If you have not had prior experience in research, then describe an experience in which you had to problem-solve your way to a good solution. How might this experience have prepared you for conducting research?
• What are your reasons for applying to the University of Wisconsin–Madison?  Include in your reason(s) how earning a PhD in nursing at UW–Madison addresses your professional goals.
• Aligning student’s research interests with faculty expertise can be based on a topic, question, population, or type of research method used. Assuming that your ideas would develop and become refined in a PhD program, which  researcher(s)  at UW–Madison School of Nursing can you imagine yourself working with and why?
• Describe characteristics you are looking for in a faculty advisor and mentor?

The  Early Entry PhD Option  is an innovative program designed for undergraduate students interested in pursuing a research career.

With the assistance of a faculty advisory committee, early-entry students plan an individualized program of study and research. They draw on existing undergraduate and graduate courses in nursing and related disciplines. This option includes early and intensive research training, clinical practice, and required and recommended coursework.

Two degrees are awarded to students who complete this option:

• a Bachelor of Science in Nursing (BSN), granted by the UW–Madison School of Nursing
• a Doctor of Philosophy (PhD), granted by the UW–Madison Graduate School

Connect with Us

If you have questions, would like to discuss visit options , or want to be connected with faculty members, please contact us. We are happy to arrange connections with current students as well. They can often provide special insight into the program, academic services, and life at the University and in Madison.

Graduate Admissions

Email: admissions @nursing.wisc.edu

Phone: 608-263-5180

Kristine L. Kwekkeboom, PhD, RN, FAAN

Position title: Professor, Lillian S. Moehlman Bascom Professor in Nursing and PhD Program Director

Email: kwekkeboom @wisc.edu

Phone: 608-263-5168

Georgetown School of Nursing Launches Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) in Nursing Program

Posted in GUMC Stories  |  Tagged graduate education , nursing , nursing education , PhD in Nursing Program , School of Nursing

(July 1, 2022) — Georgetown University School of Nursing announces its new PhD in Nursing program, a premier doctoral program designed for individuals seeking to advance the discipline and those they serve in academic, community health, health care, policy, global and research settings.

The program, launching in fall 2023, will draw upon the interdisciplinary and intellectual richness of the globally recognized, values-based Georgetown community to address the critical topics of racial and social justice, diversity, equity and inclusion by preparing future nursing leaders to approach research through interdisciplinarity and the innovative intersections of practice, research, service and teaching.

“The PhD in Nursing is an expression of the school’s mission-based commitment to advance nursing science with an integrated and intentional curriculum in health equity and ethics,” says Roberta Waite, EdD, PMHCNS, RN, MSN, ANEF, FAAN, dean of the School of Nursing.

“The PhD in Nursing will prepare local, national and global nurse scientists and scholars to lead in discovery, translation and dissemination in order to promote health equity, ethics and social justice for all,” she adds.

Nursing PhD students work with faculty who have expertise in multidimensional and complementary areas — for example, health disparities and equity, ethics, mental health, women’s health, cardiovascular conditions, oncology and physiology — and across practice settings.

“The PhD in Nursing program at Georgetown will immerse future nurse scholars and leaders in our globally recognized, intellectually vibrant community across diverse research areas and academic disciplines such as ethics, law, philosophy and policy,” explains program director Kelley M. Anderson, PhD, FNP, CHFN, associate professor of nursing.

A PhD program with a focus on social justice distinguishes it from other graduate programs, says Edilma Yearwood, PhD, PMHCNS-BC, FAAN, associate professor of nursing and the dean’s senior advisor for diversity, equity, inclusion and belonging, and anti-racism.

“We will educate the next generation of nurse scientists to advance new knowledge with a deep appreciation of how values-based questions frame their work,” Yearwood says.

Applications are now being accepted through December 1, 2022, for the fall 2023 class. Prospective PhD students can request more information here . Please direct questions about the PhD in Nursing program and admissions process to [email protected] .

Doctor of Philosophy

The Doctor of Philosophy in Nursing Science program is designed to prepare nurse scientists with expertise in clinical-translational research methods to advance the scholarly discipline and to contribute to the growing body of knowledge in the field of nursing.

As the most trusted profession and the primary caregivers in the healthcare setting, nurses bring a uniquely personal perspective to research. Nurses know that optimal patient health requires a whole-person approach that recognizes the interdependencies of the different, and sometimes deeply personal, aspects of a patient’s life. That is why our PhD program emphasizes the combination of translational science methods with traditional models for research to comprehensively address health and healthcare needs of local, national and global communities.

The PhD program is high-touch, and students will have a mentor in their area of research interest and have immediate immersion in research with the opportunity to work as a Teaching Assistant or Research Assistant on day one of the program. Students will work closely with their mentor throughout the program, who will help them develop expertise in their area of interest and develop into a scholar. Students are educated by nurse scientists conducting cutting-edge research in their respective fields. In addition to their course work, the student’s education will be enriched through research seminars in which students will have the opportunity to engage with leading scientists in and outside of nursing who are conducting novel and high impact research.

Program Highlights

Areas of focus.

• Guaranteed funding for the first four years of the program
• Guaranteed housing offer (visit UCI Housing for more information)
• Leading research faculty who incorporate interdisciplinary integrative health approaches to promote population health and well-being one person, one family, one community at a time
• Strong collaborative relationships across schools — from engineering to the arts — to create novel solutions for the health challenges facing underserved communities
• Commitment to using community-informed and community-based research methods to tackle population health needs with compassion, determination, and a keen understanding of the need for appealing, user-friendly approaches to providing healthcare
• Dedicated, one-on-one mentorship in research and teaching

UCI nursing science faculty conduct interdisciplinary research that incorporates integrative health approaches to promote population health and build healthy communities. The PhD program will specifically promote the development of scientific and theoretical expertise that contributes to scholarly endeavors in six key areas:

• Integrative health and wellness promotion
• Community health
• Philosophical and theoretical foundations in nursing
• Health services and practice
• Digital technology and health
• Health disparities and diversity
• You are passionate about developing and comprehensively testing new knowledge in a selected area of nursing science.
• You are excited about incorporating translational science into nursing research endeavors.
• You desire to provide leadership for the health and well-being of communities through translational science and the understanding of social, cultural, economic and political milieu within which knowledge translation operates.
• You desire the opportunity to contribute to interdisciplinary research initiatives in your area of expertise.

Research/knowledge development

• Utilize professional and research ethics and judgment in the conduct of research
• Conduct independent original research
• Critique and integrate different scientific perspectives in the conduct of original research
• Engage in and prepare to lead interdisciplinary research teams
• Situate their knowledge within the history and philosophy of science
• Conduct culturally and linguistically compentent scholarship
• Lead in advancing the discipline through scholarly and scientific contributions
• Provide career and research mentorship to others

Dissemination

• Communicate scholarship to professional, interdisciplinary, policy, and lay audiences
• Communicate scholarship through publications and presentations
• Demonstrate understanding of the influence of politics and policy on knowledge generation and implementation

Substantive area of specialization

• Demonstrate mastery of in-depth knowledge in a substantive area

The PhD in Nursing Science is a three to five-year, full-time commitment that includes a combination of formal courses, electives, independent study, teaching assistant assignments, formal examinations, and the completion and successful defense of a doctoral dissertation based on original research that contributes to the scholarly and scientific knowledge of the nursing discipline.

Early coursework will introduce you to theoretical foundations in the nursing discipline and to advanced research methodologies in nursing, health sciences, and related fields. Elective and independent studies will contribute to expertise in areas of research leading to your dissertation.

Download sample  schedule of classes  

Application Details

OUR PROGRAMS

Must read links for prospective phd students:.

» About our Research and Researchers

» Faculty Research Interests Quicksheet

Prospective PhD Student Connection/Meeting Request Form

Which faculty mentor are you interested in meeting?

Contact Us!

Address Sue & Bill Gross Nursing & Health Sciences Hall 854 Health Sciences Road Irvine, CA 92697

Hours Monday – Friday 9:00AM to 4:30PM

Fill Contact Form Call:  949-824-1514

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Wiley-Blackwell Online Open

Understanding the value of a PhD for post‐doctoral registered UK nurses: A survey

Susan hampshaw.

1 School of Health Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield UK

2 Division of Nursing and Midwifery, Health Sciences School, University of Sheffield, Sheffield UK

Steve Robertson

Rachel king, associated data.

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

This study investigated, ‘What is the perceived value of a PhD to doctoral and postdoctoral nurses in the UK?’

Little is known about what happens to the careers of nurses who undertake a doctorate and whether they use these skills in the next career steps.

Nurses ( n  = 47) with doctorates were recruited via professional networks and twitter (@NMAHP_DoctorateStudy). Qualitative responses from the nurses were analysed using thematic analysis.

Three themes emerged from qualitative analysis: impact on career, utilization and value, and impact on self.

Conclusions

This study provides one of the few insights into how doctoral trained nurses understand and experience the value and utility of their studies to themselves and others.

Implications for nurse management

Nurse managers can play a crucial role in generating a research‐led culture within their clinical setting. This would include promoting an understanding of research as something directly related to patient benefit rather than an abstract, intellectual activity.

1. INTRODUCTION

Undertaking doctoral studies alongside clinical practice in nursing has been advocated for many years and has gained momentum over time being supported by academic infrastructure and policy levers (Moule et al.,  2017 ). Advocates, such as Kitson ( 1999 ), have argued for doctorate level education to be developed in order to build a stronger culture of inquiry in clinical nursing practice. There has been an increase in the number of nurses undertaking doctorate level research in many countries including the Australia, Scandinavia, the United Kingdom and the United States of America (Carrick‐Sen et al.,  2019 ; Henshall et al.,  2021 ; Wilkes et al.,  2015 ). In the UK, the ‘Shape of Caring’ review reiterated these earlier messages and highlighted that nurses who are educated to doctoral level should form an integral part of the clinical workforce in order to generate a research culture in practice and provide the foundation architecture to make the necessary change (Health Education England,  2015 ). This resulted in an approach to developing research alongside clinical practice through a designated Clinical Academic Pathway Framework, which was established in England for the nursing, midwifery and Allied Health Professional (NMAHP) workforce and delivered through the National Institute of Health Services Research (NIHR). However, the number of professionals developed through this route is small. Further opportunities such as access to the pre‐doctoral and doctoral fellowships have been made available for these professionals through other parts of the NIHR infrastructure tasked with delivering research capacity (Cooke et al.,  2016 ). Some argue that we are at the tipping point to sustained progress in clinical academic pathways for these professional groups (Carrick‐Sen et al.,  2019 ).

Despite these developments, there is some evidence that this increase in training opportunities has not been matched by parallel developments of infrastructure in the clinical and practice context. For instance, NMAHP progress compared to that of medics has been slow with fewer clinical academic career opportunities where research is routinely expected and undertaken as part of practice (Henshall et al.,  2021 ). A bottle neck reflecting poor post‐doctoral progress in career pathways has also been noted, particularly in nursing (Dickinson,  2017 ). Carrick‐Sen et al. ( 2019 ) acknowledge these limitations and gaps to progress, noting particular concerns around nursing and clinical leadership to support clinical academic careers. Cooke et al.'s ( 2016 ) mapping of research capacity activities supporting non‐medical professionals found that NMAHP managers have little experience of supporting clinical academic pathways. It further found that NHS career structures for clinical academic posts are inconsistent at best and non‐existent as the norm. Similarly, a small study based in Holland (van Oostveen et al.,  2017 ) highlighted that there is an absence of supporting structures for nurses who combine clinical and academic work. They describe a culture of ‘misfit’ between academic and direct patient care in nursing practice and highlight a lack of leadership in the profession to support the ambition of clinical academic careers. They also found that nursing managers did not strategically plan for clinical academic roles in services. Similar issues have been identified in Sweden where managers did not understand the competencies of nurses who have a doctorate (Orton et al.,  2019 ). Conversely, a systematic review of interventions and strategies for supporting clinical academic pathways for nurses highlighted the importance of robust clinical and academic leadership with a clear strategic vision for success, shared partnership models between academic and service provider organisations and the need for role models and well‐defined strategic goals and outcomes (Henshall et al.,  2021 ). Despite this, most doctoral graduates continue to work in the academy rather than clinical practice (Wilkes et al.,  2015 ), a situation which was not the ambition of the Shape of Caring review.

2. BACKGROUND

The study reported here set out to examine the experiences, outcomes and motivations to study in nurses who have completed doctorates. The research was developed in partnership with a community of practice (CoP) of senior research managers and lead professionals (including nurses) in the NHS. The project aimed to inform research‐practice career pathways ‘close to practice’ in the NHS. Unlike medical colleagues, such pathways were poorly established in NMAHPs. The CoP had developed a cohort of NMAHP clinical academic fellowships who were at the start of a 4‐ to 5‐year programme of work. The CoP wanted to collect information about how to support such individuals after their doctoral training. Consulting with NMAHPs with prior doctoral experience was therefore proposed as a helpful step in exploring what the support needs were and how they might be met and to help map destinations for such career pathways. A PhD is considered to be the gold standard and mark of an independent researcher (Powell & Green,  2007 ), and conversations within the CoP suggest that it could and should be the ‘gateway’ to an integrated clinical and research career.

Our study sits in the broader context of a UK national focus on increasing and improving doctoral level study (Great Britain Department for Education,  2017 ; The Royal Society,  2010 ). This is underpinned by economic theory on the role of doctoral‐level study in developing knowledge economies and the benefits of this to both society and the individual (Diamond et al.,  2014 ; Neumann & Tan,  2011 ). Specifically, this paper addresses the question, ‘What is the perceived value of a PhD to doctoral and postdoctoral nurses in the UK?’

Following ethics approval (reference number 023667), nurses and allied health professionals with doctorates from across the UK were recruited to the study via professional networks with support from the Collaboration and Leadership for Allied Health and Care Research for Yorkshire and Humber (CLAHRC‐TH). A twitter account @NMAHP_DoctorateStudy was set up for the purpose of the study, and a link to an online survey was disseminated via this twitter feed. Within twitter, accounts that were run as representative bodies or Communities of Practice (such as @PICSNurses) were targeted and these ‘organisations’ actively retweeted. The online survey was active for just over a month (5 February 2019 to 15 March 2019). Twitter users were asked to retweet and share the questionnaire link within their twitter networks. The sample is therefore a convenience sample with diversity being achieved through the snowball technique that retweeting facilitated.

The survey questions were bespoke to the aims of the study and included closed questions about professional background, motivation for undertaking a doctorate and the risks and benefits of the degree drawing on issues raised within the literature (Bryan & Guccione,  2018 ; Diamond et al.,  2014 ; Wilkes et al.,  2015 ). These questions were sense checked and amended in consultation with CoP members. The survey also included a number of open questions for respondents to provide more detail about their experiences and views (Table  1 ).

Open questions

Given the research question reported in this paper, data from nurses were separated from the clinical scientists and AHPs and analysed descriptively. Qualitative responses from the nurses were analysed using thematic analysis, and this was supported by Quirkos© software. Initial coding was undertaken independently by SR and sections of this checked by AT and RK. Further coding, categorizing and initial theme development was completed collaboratively by these three co‐authors, and then, final themes were refined in discussion with the whole research team.

4. FINDINGS

There were 214 respondents from across the UK of which there were 47 nurses (including 33 adult nurses, 4 mental health nurses, 6 children's nurses, 2 health visitors and 2 midwives).

4.1. Quantitative data

Nurses were motivated to undertake PhD study by several factors, including professional development 34 (72%) n  = 47, intellectual curiosity 32 (68%) n  = 47, seeking a career in academia 12 (26%) n  = 47 and other reasons 13 (28%) n  = 47. Other reasons included already working in academia and the PhD being expected/needed, answering a clinical problem, serendipity and personal development.

Five nurses worked in academia prior to starting the PhD, and 12 were seeking a career there (17/47 or 36%). However, 24/47 (52%) are currently working in academic posts with another 10/47 (22%) being clinical academics.

4.2. Qualitative data

Three themes emerged from analysis of the open questions: impact on career, utilization and value of the doctorate and impact on self.

4.2.1. Impact on career

When describing the route to PhD, many outlined a gradual progression to doctoral level study rather than it being part of an established career plan. It was also often linked with a move into the academic setting:

I started my career as a [specialism] nurse and completed courses to support that role, including a [specialist] nursing course and Masters degree. I developed a [specialist] nurse educators post before moving to Practice Education. I completed a NMC recognised teaching qualification during this time before moving to academia. The opportunity to complete doctoral studies was one of the factors which encouraged me to move to the university. RN14

For many working, or wanting to work, in Higher Education Institutes (HEI), the PhD was not only seen as a requirement but was recognized as an important part of career change or progression:

I undertook a PhD largely to facilitate a career change and it did this. I did a PhD then secured funding for a post‐doc and I'm now a Senior Lecturer who undertakes teaching and research. I could not have got into this position without a PhD. RN7

However, this was not the case for all of those who worked in HEIs with others suggesting it was not always linked to progression:

I could have gotten into my current job role without a PhD. I found out that academics in nursing education can operate at Bachelors, Masters and PhD level. That was a huge demotivator, especially given the volume of work that goes into it. RN16

For some in HEIs, completing a PhD represented a backward step (at least initially) in terms of career progression, status and/or salary as they moved away from clinical practice and tried to progress:

The biggest problem for me post‐doctorally was that I was starting again at the bottom of the ladder as a career researcher and it has taken me far too long to be able to get to the point I now am […] I have been offered jobs at lower grades and lower salaries than I left the NHS with. RN12

Such challenges around salary and progression were also noted by those who stayed in clinical practice or who had a clinical academic role:

Three years after graduation I'm still not back to previous salary. I'm also penalised for remaining in clinical practice as I am part time at university and cannot take on senior academic roles therefore do not fit the promotion criteria […] undervalued clinically, paid as a band 6 with no prospects of improvement in NHS, only progression possible is in academia unfortunately. RN13

These narratives around the challenges to career progression, both in HEI and clinical roles, raise questions about how, when and by whom the doctorate is utilized and valued.

4.2.2. Utilization and value of doctorate

In response to the question on the extent to which the PhD benefits their current role, the majority of participants were positive with responses such as fully utilize , completely significantly , and use them every day . This utility was noted in terms of enhanced confidence, the benefits of critical thinking skills, in supporting clinical work and in fulfilling educational roles:

Informs my critical decision making on a daily basis. RN6

Enhanced confidence, has removed some of the ‘imposter syndrome’ I frequently experienced. RN31

At its most positive, it was described as transformational:

I use all of these on a daily basis. I could not have anticipated how much of a personal and professional impact that gaining my Doctorate would have been. Although I have only had it for a short period of time, it has been transformational. RN15

For a few, however, particularly those in teaching only or clinical roles, there seemed less opportunity to utilize and further develop skills gained through the doctoral journey:

So far there has been little opportunity to use the benefits in my current role. RN14 [Nurse lecturer]

It is not required for my current role. RN17 [Specialist nurse practitioner]

This lack of opportunity to utilize skills developed was frequently linked to a lack of recognition and valuing of the doctorate by others, which limited or stifled opportunities. This seemed particularly marked in the clinical setting leading some to end up working in academic roles even when this was not the intended career trajectory:

The personal benefits from undertaking a PhD result in a great deal of frustration in the workplace because the environment, your colleagues, the context within which you work and the way you are regarded do not change. You are equipped with greater insight, a more curious mind and a better ability to problem solve and critically analyse but the culture of the NHS is not ready for it. RN10

Having a doctorate has made me into a researcher, which was not my intention. My intention was to be a consultant nurse specialist […] I had planned to return to the NHS with my PhD but my skills were not valued in that setting and I have never been able to find a job in clinical practice that valued what I could bring as a doctorally prepared nurse. RN12

There was a strong implication here that such lack of recognition was particularly prevalent among nurses own colleagues and profession. This was seen as part of a cultural denial of the importance of academic skills and a dissociation of this from clinical care:

In the past, being interested in academic study was a bit of slur in the clinical area and I seemed to be regarded as someone not committed to the clinical area or not having strong practical skills. RN2

This contrasted with how medical colleagues valued what doctoral study could bring to the clinical setting:

Significantly undervalued by the senior nursing executive, and interestingly highly valued and regarded by medical colleagues. RN24

It is interesting, of everyone I worked with I think my consultant colleagues were actually the most respectful of my doctoral qualification. They definitely spoke to me and communicated differently when they knew I was doing a doctorate and once I graduated and they really made me feel it was recognised. RM1

While the PhD was seen as beneficial and well utilized by participants themselves, recognition of its value by others, especially by peers in clinical contexts, was clearly variable.

4.2.3. Impact on self

Outside of the impact of the PhD on career, there was a range of impacts from doctoral and post‐doctoral experiences on participants themselves. Many experienced disappointment and stress during their doctoral studies often related to a lack of support and the challenges of completing doctoral study while working:

Isolated as a PhD student whilst working full time, felt unsupported at times, acute anxiety in final year pre/post VIVA. RSCN1

I was apprehensive about starting a PhD given the amount of studying I knew it would require. Therefore I moved my family 200 miles to another HEI where I was aware the support and funding was more robust. (RM2)

Employer probably does not understand how challenging it is to undertake a PhD and run a Trust‐wide clinical service. RN25

Notably, for some, similar feelings persisted in the post‐doctoral phase being linked to the lack of recognition and value attached to the doctorate as well as to work pressure and expectations:

In HEI, in nursing in particular, the university wants you to teach, supervise, mark, manage modules, generate income, publish world leading outputs, supervise doctoral students etc. Do I feel valued? No. I just feel the demands are unrealistic. They want the penny and the bun. It's actually depressing for me and I'm increasingly disillusioned. RN7

However, despite these challenges, there was clearly a huge sense of pride and achievement attached to completing the PhD even when it did not seem to advance career or to be valued and recognized by others:

This has given me great kudos and respect outside my clinical team—and I am still able to undertake outcomes research in my field of expertise both individually and collaboratively on an international ‘stage’. It's still the best thing I ever did! RSCN5

The personal impact of the doctoral and post‐doctoral journey clearly varied then not only between participants but for the same participants at different points in the journey.

5. DISCUSSION

Key points emerge from this study. While the majority of participants could and did utilize the learning from their doctoral training, the opportunity to maximize the value of this was seen as more limited for those who remained in clinical settings. Other career opportunities, particularly in clinical settings, were seen as limited at best. These findings reaffirm research from the Netherlands (van Oostveen et al.,  2017 ) where a nursing culture that emphasizes direct patient care is perceived as an academic misfit and where insufficient leadership and supporting structures were seen to stifle clinical academic opportunities. Bullin ( 2018 ) describes this misfit as being (at least partly) a result of differences in epistemic cultures between professional nursing communities (based around discipline specific knowledge for clinical practice) and educational settings (based on critical thinking and transformational learning).

This cultural rift has been recognized in other empirical work. For example, a study from Australia (Borbasi & Emden,  2001 ) conducted interviews with nurses in positions of responsibility for employing nurses. While these employers recognized many of the same skills developed through doctoral study that our participants outlined, results also suggested a discrepancy between these skills and those required in practice and a ‘high degree of scepticism as to the usefulness of the degree for the workplace’ (Borbasi & Emden,  2001 , p. 192). Similarly, research from the US among Chief Nursing Officers found that while those surveyed had mainly positive perceptions of the doctorate, only 19% felt that nurse executives should pursue a doctorate of nursing, and only 9% believed that a doctorate should be the recommended degree option for nurse executives (Swanson & Stanton,  2013 ). There is an on‐going challenge then in helping colleagues and organisations recognize the link between skills developed through doctoral study and benefits for the clinical setting and patient care.

Our findings further highlight the financial and personal sacrifices that nurses often make when pursuing doctoral study. These sacrifices are not only made during the period of the PhD but, importantly, any career benefits that do accrue are frequently preceded by a (sometimes prolonged) post‐doctoral period of reduced salary and diminished status. The personal challenges of completing doctoral study while continuing to work, and the sacrifices made in doing so, have been well documented (e.g., Baldwin,  2013 ; Trusson et al.,  2019 ), but less attention seems to have been paid to the positive personal impact. Both Baldwin ( 2013 ) and Trusson et al. ( 2019 ) do, however, note the sense of personal achievement and increased confidence highlighted by our participants. The extent of the financial and personal sacrifices noted in our current study is likely, in part, to be a result of limited nurse leadership and a still underdeveloped infrastructure to support and develop clinical academic pathways for nurses in ways comparable to their medical colleagues.

Finally, findings here suggest that when such leadership and support are present, when nurses feel their doctoral skills are valued by their organisation and within their clinical setting, then doctoral study is seen as less of a risk (and therefore more attractive). Leadership and support can help bridge the cultural rift noted above. While recognizing how accessing funding and training (such as that provided by NIHR) is beyond the reach of many nurses at the point‐of‐care delivery, Cooper et al. ( 2019 ) highlight a range of practical, applied examples for supporting clinical career development for NMAHPs. These focus on strategic commitment, generating structures to engage, enthuse and empower, and realizing benefits for staff and patient experience—the very areas our participants thrived off when present and experienced as serious challenges when they were not.

6. LIMITATIONS

This study makes important contribution but is not without limitations. The recruitment routes for the study generated a convenience sample that may not be representative of UK doctoral nurses—although there is a reasonable spread across the four nations of the UK and across the fields of nursing practice. Caution should therefore be exercised in regard to the generalizability of these findings.

Finally, all data collected relied on self‐reported information. Such reporting is, by nature, subjective. However, as the aim of the study is to explore the perceived value of a PhD to nurses, it is the very substance of these subjective accounts that constitute the intended focus of the data.

7. CONCLUSIONS

This study provides one of the few insights into how doctoral trained nurses understand and experience the value and utility of their studies to themselves and others. Despite attempts in the UK to develop research alongside clinical practice, findings suggest that there remain barriers for nurses wishing to develop clinical career pathways through doctoral study. In particular, a cultural rift in how the skills and knowledge gained through doctoral study might benefit patients, clinical settings and organisations often leads to an undervaluing of the PhD and a concomitant loss of doctoral nurses from clinical settings to academia even when this is not a personally desired outcome for nurses embarking on such study. However, where organisational infrastructure and leadership recognize, support and value what doctoral skills can bring then the opportunities and benefits known to accrue from research‐led clinical environments are more likely to emerge and clinical‐academic pathways become more embedded.

8. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSE MANAGEMENT

Nurse managers can play a crucial role in generating a research‐led culture within their clinical setting: a culture that helps bridge the current misfit between clinical practice and critical thinking. This would include promoting an understanding of research as something directly related to patient benefit rather than an abstract, distant, intellectual activity.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

There is no conflict of interest.

FUNDING INFORMATION

This study was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Collaboration and Leadership for Allied Health and Care Research for Yorkshire and Humber (CLAHRC YH). The analysis and reporting for this paper were further funded by the Royal College of Nursing (RCN) as part of the Strategic Research Alliance between the RCN and the University of Sheffield.

ETHICS STATEMENT

Ethical approval was gained from the University of Sheffield, School of and Health and Related Research: reference number 023667.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The research was developed in partnership with a community of practice (CoP) of senior research managers and lead professionals (nurses and AHPs) in the NHS. This CoP called ACORN (Addressing Capacity in Organisations to do Research Network) based in the North of England (see https://www.arc-yh.nihr.ac.uk/what-we-do/capacity-building/acorn ).

Hampshaw, S. , Cooke, J. , Robertson, S. , Wood, E. , King, R. , & Tod, A. (2022). Understanding the value of a PhD for post‐doctoral registered UK nurses: A survey . Journal of Nursing Management , 30 ( 4 ), 1011–1017. 10.1111/jonm.13581 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]

Funding information Royal College of Nursing; National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Collaboration and Leadership for Allied Health and Care Research for Yorkshire and Humber

DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT

• Baldwin, S. (2013). Exploring the experiences of nurses studying professional doctorates . British Journal of Nursing , 22 ( 8 ), 476–483. 10.12968/bjon.2013.22.8.476 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Borbasi, S. , & Emden, C. (2001). Is a PhD the best career choice? Nursing employers' views . Contemporary Nurse: A Journal for the Australian Nursing Profession , 10 ( 3–4 ), 187–194. 10.5172/conu.10.3-4.187 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bryan, B. , & Guccione, K. (2018). Was it worth it? A qualitative exploration into graduate perceptions of doctoral value . Higher Education Research and Development , 37 ( 6 ), 1124–1140. 10.1080/07294360.2018.1479378 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bullin, C. (2018). To what extent has doctoral (PhD) education supported academic nurse educators in their teaching roles: An integrative review . BMC Nursing , 17 ( 1 ), e1–e18. 10.1186/s12912-018-0273-3 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Carrick‐Sen, D. M. , Moore, A. , Davidson, P. , Gendong, H. , & Jackson, D. (2019). View of international perspectives of nurses, midwives and allied health professionals clinical academic roles: Are we at tipping point? International Journal of Practice‐Based Learning in Health and Social Care , 7 ( 1 ), 1–15. 10.18552/ijpblhsc.v7i2.639 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cooke, J. , Bray, K. , & Sriram, V. (2016). Mapping research capacity activities in the CLAHRC community supporting non‐medical professionals .
• Cooper, J. , Mitchell, K. , Richardson, A. , & Bramley, L. (2019). Developing the role of the clinical academic nurse, midwife and allied health professional in healthcare organisations . International Journal of Practice‐Based Learning in Health and Social Care , 7 ( 2 ), 16–24. 10.18552/ijpblhsc.v7i2.637 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Diamond, A. , Ball, C. , Vorley, T. , Hughes, T. , Howe, P. , & Nathwani, T. (2014). The impact of doctoral careers . Final Report , 130. [ Google Scholar ]
• Dickinson, J. (2017). UK‐wide survey of clinical and health research fellowships 2017 UK‐wide survey of clinical and health research fellowships 3 .
• Great Britain Department for Education . (2017). Postgraduate doctoral loans: Government consultation response .
• Health Education England . (2015). Raising the Bar shape of caring: A review of the future education and training of registered nurses and care assistants .
• Henshall, C. , Kozlowska, O. , Walthall, H. , Heinen, A. , Smith, R. , & Carding, P. (2021). Interventions and strategies aimed at clinical academic pathway development for nurses in the United Kingdom: A systematised review of the literature . Journal of Clinical Nursing , 30 ( 11–12 ), 1502–1518. 10.1111/jocn.15657 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kitson, A. (1999). The relevance of scholarship for nursing research and practice . Journal of Advanced Nursing , 29 ( 4 ), 778–775. 10.1111/j.1365-2648.2006.04004_1.x [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Moule, P. , Aveyard, H. , & Goodman, M. L. (2017). Nursing research: An introduction (3rd ed.). Sage Publications Ltd. [ Google Scholar ]
• Neumann, R. , & Tan, K. K. (2011). From PhD to initial employment: The doctorate in a knowledge economy . Studies in Higher Education , 36 ( 5 ), 601–614. 10.1080/03075079.2011.594596 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Orton, M. L. , Andersson, Å. , Wallin, L. , Forsman, H. , & Eldh, A. C. (2019). Nursing management matters for registered nurses with a PhD working in clinical practice . Journal of Nursing Management , 27 ( 5 ), 955–962. 10.1111/jonm.12750 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Powell, S. , & Green, H. (2007). The doctorate worldwide . Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Swanson, M. L. , & Stanton, M. P. (2013). Chief nursing officers' perceptions of the doctorate of nursing practice degree . Nursing Forum , 48 ( 1 ), 35–44. 10.1111/nuf.12003 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• The Royal Society . (2010). The scientific century: Securing our future prosperity .
• Trusson, D. , Rowley, E. , & Bramley, L. (2019). A mixed‐methods study of challenges and benefits of clinical academic careers for nurses, midwives and allied health professionals . BMJ Open , 9 ( 10 ), e030595. 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-030595 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• van Oostveen, C. J. , Goedhart, N. S. , Francke, A. L. , & Vermeulen, H. (2017). Combining clinical practice and academic work in nursing: A qualitative study about perceived importance, facilitators and barriers regarding clinical academic careers for nurses in university hospitals . Journal of Clinical Nursing , 26 ( 23–24 ), 4973–4984. 10.1111/jocn.13996 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Wilkes, L. A. , Cummings, J. , Ratanapongleka, M. , & Carter, B. E. (2015). Doctoral theses in nursing and midwifery: Challenging their contribution to nursing scholarship and the profession . Australian Journal of Advanced Nursing , 32 ( 4 ), 6–14. [ Google Scholar ]