MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W1974183321 · doi:10.1046/j.1365-2648.2002.02143.x

An empirical test of the Nursing Role Effectiveness Model

2002· article· en· W1974183321 sur OpenAlex

Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base

Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.

affAu moins un auteur déclare une institution canadienne dans l'instantané OpenAlex épinglé.

Notice bibliographique

RevueJournal of Advanced Nursing · 2002
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineNursing
ThématiqueNursing education and management
Établissements canadiensLakeridge HealthHamilton Health SciencesHealth Sciences CentreUniversity of Toronto
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésNursingStructural equation modelingNursing Outcomes ClassificationNursing careAuditMedicineTest (biology)Surgical nursingPrimary nursingAffect (linguistics)PsychologyNurse education

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

AIMS OF THE STUDY: This study investigated the propositions depicted in the Nursing Role Effectiveness Model, in which nurse and patient structural variables were expected to influence nurses' role performance, which, in turn was expected to affect patient outcome achievement. RATIONALE/BACKGROUND: Increasingly, nurses are expected to demonstrate their contribution to patient outcome achievement as a basis for evaluating practice and for monitoring improvements in practice. A model was developed that describes nursing practice in relationship to the roles nurses assume in health care, and links patient and system outcomes to nurses' role functions (Nursing Economics 1998: 16, 58-64, 87). RESEARCH METHODS: A cross-sectional design was used to collect data on the structure, process, and outcome variables. Data were collected through structured questionnaires and chart audit, involving a total of 372 patients and 254 nurses from 26 general medical-surgical units in a tertiary care hospital. Patient structural variables included medical diagnosis, age, gender and education. Nurse structural variables included educational preparation and length of hospital experience. The unit structural variables included the adequacy of time to provide care, autonomy, and role tension. The quality of nurses' independent role performance was assessed by collecting data from patients on their perception of the quality of nursing care. Nurses' interdependent role performance was assessed by collecting data from nurses on the quality of nurse communication and co-ordination of care. Patient outcomes were assessed through self-report and consisted of the patients' therapeutic self-care ability, functional status, and mood disturbance at the time of hospital discharge. Structural equation modelling was used to test the hypothesized relationships among the structural, process, and outcome variables. RESULTS: Patients viewed nurses' independent role performance more effective on units where nurses reported less autonomy but more time to provide care. The quality of nurse communication was higher on units where nurses had higher education, more autonomy, less hospital experience, and lower role tension. However, the co-ordination of care was more effective on units where nurses had higher education, greater hospital experience, less autonomy and role tension. The three role performance variables were associated with patients' therapeutic self-care ability at hospital discharge. Nurses' independent role performance was associated with better patient functional status and less mood disturbance at hospital discharge. The role performance variables fully mediated the effect of the structural variables on patient outcomes, lending support for the proposition that nurses' role performance explains the relationship between structural variables, such as nurse education and autonomy, and patient outcome achievement. DISCUSSION: The Nursing Role Effectiveness Model provides a well-defined conceptual framework to guide the evaluation of outcomes of nursing care. For the most part the hypothesized relationships among the variables were supported. However, further work is needed to develop an understanding of how nurses engage in their co-ordinating role functions and how we can measures these role activities.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Expérimental (laboratoire) · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,671
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,537

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,001
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,022
Tête enseignante GPT0,355
Écart entre enseignants0,333 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle