NURS 225 Week 4 Worldview Self-Reflection Paper Example

A Christian Worldview and the Research Decisions a Nurse Makes: Participating, Conducting and Funding Research

Last spring, my aunt was invited to join a clinical trial for her breast cancer surgery, and she called me, the nursing student in the family, to ask whether she should. I realized I had no settled way to think about the question. This paper works out how my Christian worldview shapes three research decisions I will face as a nurse: whether to take part in research, how to do research and evidence work and what research to support.

Participating in Research

My worldview begins with the conviction that each human being bears the image of God (English Standard Version Bible, 2001/2016, Genesis 1:27). That conviction cuts two ways. It means no person may be used merely as a means to someone else's end, which is why the protections Boswell and Cannon (2017) describe, including consent freely given after full explanation, prior approval of the study by an ethics board and the freedom to leave at any point, matter so much. It also means that people have the dignity to choose to help others, even at some cost to themselves.

Evidence suggests that many participants see their involvement exactly that way. Collins et al. (2026) surveyed patients who had taken part in a randomized trial of a sentinel node technique in early breast cancer; of the 45 who responded, altruism was the strongest motivation, and most reported being comfortable with randomization. Genna et al. (2026) describe how clinical research nurses support trial participants through education, safety monitoring and follow-up, which suggests that nurses have a role in making participation both safe and meaningful.

My decision is that I would participate, and would encourage others to consider participating, in research that is reviewed, voluntary and honest about its risks, and that I would treat my role in recruiting patients as protecting their freedom to say no. That is what I told my aunt: ask every question, read the consent, and decide freely. She joined the trial, and she told me later that knowing she could withdraw at any time made it easier to say yes.

Conducting Research and Evidence Work

The second area is how I take part in research activities, including the evidence work I already do as a student. Scripture calls believers to truthfulness: "Therefore, having put away falsehood, let each one of you speak the truth with his neighbor" (English Standard Version Bible, 2001/2016, Ephesians 4:25). In research, falsehood can enter in small ways: a result reported more confidently than the data allow, a source cited without being read, data quietly dropped.

A new form of this problem shows why it matters now. Iheduru-Anderson (2026) describes an undergraduate nursing student who submitted references to journal articles and DOIs that did not exist, generated by an artificial intelligence tool, and argues that such fabrication is often unintentional but reveals a deeper gap in understanding evidence-based scholarship. Fabricated evidence in a student paper and fabricated evidence in a published study differ in scale but not in kind. My decision is to open and read every source I cite, to report findings as cautiously as the evidence requires and to be open about any help I use in writing.

Funding Research

The third area is which research I support, whether through donations, advocacy or the projects I choose to work on. My worldview teaches stewardship: resources are entrusted to us and should be used faithfully (English Standard Version Bible, 2001/2016, 1 Corinthians 4:2). Stewardship asks two questions of research funding: does the research respect human life and dignity, and is it independent enough to tell the truth?

The second question is practical. Su et al. (2026) analyzed public data on industry-sponsored research payments to physician investigators in the United States and found that these payments totaled $33.9 billion between 2016 and 2022, most of it channeled through organizations other than teaching hospitals. Industry funding supports much valuable research, but its size means that disclosure and independent design and reporting are essential. My decision is to support research, through giving or my own involvement, that discloses its funding, protects participants and respects human life at every stage, and to read funding statements as part of appraising any study.

Conclusion

The same conviction that every person bears God's image tells me to protect research participants, to tell the truth about evidence and to fund only what honors both. My worldview does not make me suspicious of research; it gives me reasons to value it and limits that keep it humane. In practice, that means helping patients decide freely, reading every source I cite and asking who paid for a study before I trust it.

References

Boswell, C., & Cannon, S. (2017). Introduction to nursing research: Incorporating evidence-based practice (4th ed.). Jones & Bartlett Learning.

Collins, P., Pitsinis, V., Khitab, N., & Benson, J. R. (2026). Evaluation of patient experience from participation in the randomized INFLUENCE trial on fluorescence-guided sentinel node surgery. Surgery, 196, 110289. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surg.2026.110289

English Standard Version Bible. (2016). Crossway. (Original work published 2001)

Genna, C., Thekkan, K. R., Rodelli, S., Amatucci, V., Turchini, L., Giordano, L. N., Bozzetti, M., & Napolitano, D. (2026). Patient-centered activities performed by clinical research nurses in clinical trials: A scoping review of enacted practice. Healthcare, 14(18), 3111. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare14183111

Iheduru-Anderson, K. (2026). Eroding scholarly integrity: Confronting the misuse of generative AI in nursing education. Nurse Education Today, 164, 107145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2026.107145

Su, Z. T., Hammadeh, Z., Galansky, L. B., Arbuiso, A. G., Jing, Y., Trock, B. J., & Han, M. (2026). Distribution of industry-sponsored research payments to US physician principal investigators. PLOS ONE, 21(9), e0358886. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0358886