MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1833934977 · doi:10.1111/jocn.12996

Preregistration student nurses' self‐reported preparedness for practice before and after the introduction of a capstone subject

2015· article· en· W1833934977 on OpenAlexaff
Kim Usher, Jane Mills, Caryn West, Tanya Park, Cindy Woods

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Nursing · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicNursing education and management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersFar North Queensland Hospital Foundation
KeywordsPreparednessCapstoneMedicineNursingNurse educationCapstone courseMedical educationPsychologyCurriculumPedagogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: To assess changes in perceptions of confidence and preparedness for practice of preregistration nursing students before and after the introduction of a capstone subject, and factors associated with perceptions of preparedness. BACKGROUND: Preregistration nursing student 'readiness' or 'preparedness' for practice has been highlighted in the literature in recent years, along with employer concerns that university graduate nurses are not work ready. Few studies have examined Australian preregistration nursing students' perceptions of preparedness for clinical practice following their final clinical placement or assessed whether preregistration student nurses' perceptions of preparedness change as the result of undertaking a capstone subject. DESIGN: A capstone subject was introduced at a regional northern Australian university in 2013. Perceptions of preparedness were assessed in two different cohorts of final year nursing students; one of which undertook a capstone subject. METHODS: Two separate cohorts of third year nursing students were surveyed regarding their perceptions of preparedness for practice at the conclusion of their final 240 hour clinical placement. The 2012 cohort did not experience a capstone subject, whereas the 2013 cohort were the first nursing students to experience the new capstone subject. RESULTS: Both cohorts were uncomfortable performing invasive procedures and reported low levels of confidence in the area of professional identity. An overall trend of decreasing confidence as patient assignment size increased was observed for both cohorts, and higher confidence was associated with previous health care experience. Perceptions of preparedness for practice did not increase significantly following the introduction of a capstone subject. CONCLUSIONS: Although Australian undergraduate nursing student report feeling prepared for practice there are areas of knowledge, skills and patient care in which confidence is low. The results of this study highlight the importance of experience in building confidence and competence. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: This study highlights that while final year nursing students report feeling prepared for practice there are areas where additional support can be provided. It is recommended that nurse educators and health care facilities tailor their programs to provide support focused on the areas highlighted by this study.

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 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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.520
Threshold uncertainty score0.391

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.003
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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.461
Teacher spread0.415 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations46
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical NursingSame topicNursing education and managementFrench-language works237,207