Modelo de doble proceso sobre el "síndrome de quemarse por el trabajo" (burnout): su relevancia en profesionales de enfermería de España y Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
El objetivo de este estudio es explorar un modelo de doble proceso sobre el sindrome de quemarse por el trabajo (SQT) (burnout). La muestra estuvo formada por profesionales de enfermeria espanoles (N = 834) y canadienses (N = 725), que rellenaron un cuestionario para evaluar el SQT y percepciones de su vida laboral. Un proceso hipotetiza que la sobrecarga laboral agota a las profesionales de enfermeria debido al exceso de demandas y a que interfiere en su capacidad de recuperacion. Segun el segundo modelo los conflictos entre los valores personales y organizacionales tienen efectos que influyen en el desarrollo del SQT. Se realizaron analisis de regresion multiple para analizar los dos procesos del SQT. La sobrecarga predijo los niveles el agotamiento, y la congruencia entre valores personales y organizacionales resulto un predictor significativo de las tres dimensiones del SQT explicando mayores porcentajes de varianza a los explicados por la sobrecarga laboral. Se obtuvo evidencia para ambos procesos en las dos muestras. En la discusion se presentan las implicaciones para un modelo comprehensivo sobre el SQT.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".