MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1974515442 · doi:10.7202/039846ar

L’intention de demeurer en poste chez les nouvelles infirmières* diplômées du Nouveau-Brunswick

2010· article· fr· W1974515442 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Ann Rhéaume, Noëlline LeBel, Gérène Gautreau

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue de l’Université de Moncton · 2010
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldHealth Professions
TopicWorkplace Health and Well-being
Canadian institutionsCanadian Nurses AssociationUniversité de Moncton
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Les nouvelles infirmières diplômées intègrent un marché de travail difficile et complexe suite aux réformes du système de santé canadien des années 1990. Les ressources limitées et une charge de travail élevée ont eu un effet assez négatif sur la rétention de ces infirmières. Dans cet environnement très exigeant la nouvelle infirmière diplômée est plus apte à quitter son emploi. Le but de cette étude descriptive corrélationnelle est d’examiner les facteurs qui influencent l’intention de demeurer en poste des nouvelles infirmières diplômées du Nouveau-Brunswick. Pour ce faire, un questionnaire a été administré à un échantillon de 87 nouvelles infirmières diplômées du Nouveau-Brunswick. Les résultats montrent que l’intention de demeurer en poste est prédite de façon significative par trois facteurs : la vision des soins infirmiers du personnel infirmier en place, l’engagement envers l’employeur et la perception qu’ont les nouvelles diplômées de pouvoir influencer les décisions prises dans leur milieu de travail.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.452
Threshold uncertainty score0.909

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2010
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue de l’Université de MonctonSame topicWorkplace Health and Well-beingFrench-language works237,207