MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1700758600 · doi:10.5430/jnep.v5n9p17

The effect of guidance booklet on knowledge and attitudes of nurses regarding disaster preparedness at hospitals

2015· article· en· W1700758600 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Nursing Education and Practice · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicDisaster Response and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPreparednessWorkloadTest (biology)Data collectionNursingMedicineDemographicsDisaster preparednessSample (material)Medical emergencyEmergency managementPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background : Disasters have a potential of producing mass casualties thereby straining the health care systems. This means that hospitals need to be prepared for an unusual increase in workload, hence the importance of hospital disaster preparedness. Aim: The aim of the study to evaluate the effect of a guidance booklet on knowledge and attitude about disaster preparedness among nurses. Methods : Research design: A quasi experimental research design with pre-test post-test time series and follow up assessment. Setting: the study was conducted at University Hospital, in Menoufia Governorate, Egypt. Subjects: The convenience sample, it include all nursing managers (nursing directors and nursing supervisors n = 12), all head nurses (n = 48) and staff nurses (n = 280), available at the time of the study. They have all fulfilled the eligibility criterion of a working experience of not less than one year of the study settings. Tools of data collection: Two tools were used for data collection. Tool one: consists of three parts; part (a) to collect socio-demographics data and part (b) aimed to collect nurses' knowledge about general disaster, classification and disaster preparedness and part (c) aimed to assess the nurses' awareness by hospital disasters on external or internal level. Tool two: Attitudes of nurses towards disaster management plan. Results : The results of this study showed that, majority of nurses scored weak estimation in knowledge, awareness and attitudes level at pre-test measurement. Conversely, lowest percentages had moderate level, and good level of knowledge related to general disaster, while only 12.6% of nurses were satisfactory awareness about hospital disaster preparedness and 37.5% had positive attitude towards disaster management. There was statistically-significant ( p < .001). Conclusions : It was concluded that, guidance booklet was successful in achieving significant improvement in nurses ’ knowledge regarding disaster preparedness which was reflected in improvement and changing their attitude towards disaster. Recommendation: Continued nursing education should be open to all hospital staff according to their needs to increase their awareness about disaster preparedness.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.395
Threshold uncertainty score0.275

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.101
GPT teacher head0.526
Teacher spread0.426 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it