MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1915982663 · doi:10.1111/jpm.12064

Exploring the experience of <scp>C</scp>anadian registered psychiatric nurses: a phenomenological study

2013· article· en· W1915982663 on OpenAlexaffabout
John Jackson, Patrick J. Morrissette

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicHealthcare Decision-Making and Restraints
Canadian institutionsBrandon University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNursingWorryPerceptionPsychiatryPsychiatric wardAggressionMedicinePsychologyAnxiety

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Accessible summary This study was undertaken to explore the experience of registered psychiatric nurses in the province of Manitoba, Canada. Results of this study revealed six predominant themes including how psychiatric nursing is perceived by the public and allied professionals, the aggressive behaviour and management of patients, the involvement of family members regarding the care of their loved ones, the relationship between physicians and psychiatric nurses, the sense of responsibility and worry associated with psychiatric nursing, and the gradual shift in educational standards and movement towards traditional medical intervention. Results from this study can benefit patients, psychiatric nurses, and psychiatric nurse educators. Abstract This paper describes a phenomenological study that was conducted in 2012 and investigated the experiences of registered psychiatric nurses working in the province of Manitoba. Ten registered psychiatric nurses participated in semistructured, audio‐recorded interviews, during which they described their experiences, yielding written protocols that were thematically analysed. Results from this study revealed six predominant themes that included (1) perception of psychiatric nursing; (2) patient aggression; (3) patient family involvement; (4) nurse–doctor relationship; (5) responsibility and worry; and (6) shift in practice and educational standards. The results of this study can assist in better understanding registered psychiatric nursing practice, inform educational programmes, and spawn future research.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.635
Threshold uncertainty score0.632

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.111
GPT teacher head0.407
Teacher spread0.296 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations6
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Psychiatric and Mental Health NursingSame topicHealthcare Decision-Making and RestraintsFrench-language works237,207