New graduate nurses’ experiences of bullying and burnout in hospital settings
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: This paper is a report of a study conducted to test a model linking new graduate nurses' perceptions of structural empowerment to their experiences of workplace bullying and burnout in Canadian hospital work settings using Kanter's work empowerment theory. BACKGROUND: There are numerous anecdotal reports of bullying of new graduates in healthcare settings, which is linked to serious health effects and negative organizational effects. METHODS: We tested the model using data from the first wave of a 2009 longitudinal study of 415 newly graduated nurses (<3 years of experience) in acute care hospitals across Ontario, Canada. Variables were measured using the Conditions of Work Effectiveness Questionnaire, Negative Acts Questionnaire-Revised and Maslach Burnout Inventory-General Survey. RESULTS: The final model fit statistics revealed a reasonably adequate fit (χ² = 14·9, d.f. = 37, IFI = 0·98, CFI = 0·98, RMSEA = 0·09). Structural empowerment was statistically significantly and negatively related to workplace bullying exposure (β = -0·37), which in turn, was statistically significantly related to all three components of burnout (Emotional exhaustion: β = 0·41, Cynicism: β = 0·28, EFFICACY: β = -0·17). Emotional exhaustion had a direct effect on cynicism (β = 0·51), which in turn, had a direct effect on efficacy (β = -0·34). Conclusion. The results suggest that new graduate nurses' exposure to bullying may be less when their work environments provide access to empowering work structures, and that these conditions promote nurses' health and wellbeing.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it