Investigating the work–life experiences of nursing faculty in Canadian academic settings and the factors that influence their retention: protocol for a mixed-method study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
INTRODUCTION: While all research-oriented faculty face the pressures of academia, female faculty in fields including science, engineering, medicine and nursing, are especially susceptible to burnout. Nursing is unique in that it remains a predominantly female-dominated profession, which implies that there is a critical mass of females who are disproportionately affected and/or at higher risk of burnout. To date, little is known about the experiences of nursing faculty especially, new and early career researchers and the factors that influence their retention. This study aims to understand the work-life (the intersection of work with personal life) experiences of nursing faculty in Canadian academic settings and the factors that influence their retention. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A mixed-method design will be used in this study. For the quantitative study, a sample of approximately 1500 new and early career nursing faculty across Canadian academic institutions will be surveyed. Eligible participants will be invited to complete a web-based structured questionnaire in both French and English language. Data will be evaluated using generalised linear regression model and structural equation modelling. Given the complexities of work-life issues in Canada, qualitative focus group interviews with about 20-25 participants will also be conducted. Emerging themes will be integrated with the survey findings and used to enrich the interpretation of the quantitative data. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study has received ethical approval from the Hamilton Integrated Research Ethics Board (#1477). Prior to obtaining informed consent, participants will be provided with information about study risks and benefits and strategies undertaken to ensure confidentiality and anonymity. The study findings will be disseminated to academics and non-academic stakeholders through national and international conference presentations and peer-reviewed open-access journals. A user-friendly report will be shared with professional nursing associations such as the Canadian Associations of Schools of Nursing, and through public electronic forums (e.g., Twitter). Evidence from this study will also be shared with stakeholders including senior academic leaders and health practitioners, government, and health service policy-makers, to raise the profile of discourses on the nursing workforce shortages; and women's work-life balance, a public policy issue often overlooked at the national level. Such discussion is especially pertinent in light of the disproportionate impact of COVID-19 on women, and female academics. The findings will be used to inform policy options for improving nursing faculty retention in Canada and globally.
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.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,070 | 0,041 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,004 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,004 | 0,004 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,005 | 0,006 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,010 | 0,004 |
| Communication savante | 0,005 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,005 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,005 | 0,006 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,049 | 0,007 |
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.
score_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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».