MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Staff engagement as a target for managing work environments in psychiatric hospitals: implications for workforce stability and quality of care

2012· article· en· W1964197055 on OpenAlex
Peter Van Bogaert, Sean P. Clarke, Riet Willems, Mieke Mondelaers

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Nursing · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicNursing education and management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoRoyal Bank of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBurnoutWork engagementWorkloadWorkforceNursingJob satisfactionMental healthHealth careWork (physics)PsychologyQuality (philosophy)MedicinePsychiatryClinical psychologySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: To examine relationships between practice environment ratings, workload, work engagement, job outcomes and assessments of quality of care in nursing personnel in psychiatric hospitals. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey. BACKGROUND: A broad base of research studies in health care reveals important links between work environment factors, staff burnout and organisational outcomes that merit examination in inpatient mental healthcare settings. Work engagement, a positively framed parallel construct for burnout, may offer an additional insight into the impacts of work on staff. METHODS: A sample of 357 registered nurses (65·5%), licensed practical nurses (23·5%) and non-registered caregiver (10·6%) of two Belgian psychiatric hospitals were surveyed. A causal model was tested using structural equation modelling, whereby it was proposed that work engagement would be influenced by work environment factors and itself impact perceived quality of care and staff job outcomes such as job satisfaction and turnover intentions. RESULTS: An adjusted model was confirmed. Practice environment features influenced staff vigour and dedication and demonstrated positive effects on job satisfaction, turnover intentions and perceived quality of care through their effects on absorption. CONCLUSION: The findings of this study suggest that work engagement is a likely direct consequence of practice environments that may ultimately have impacts on both staff and patient outcomes. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Leaders, nurse managers, clinicians as well as nurses themselves should be aware of the importance of work environments in mental healthcare facilities that favour engagement. Future efforts should focus on developing and sustaining practice environments that engage mental healthcare workers within interdisciplinary teams with the goal of creating a stable workforce possessing optimal possible knowledge, skills and abilities for delivering care.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.547
Threshold uncertainty score0.542

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.098
GPT teacher head0.465
Teacher spread0.367 · 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