MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1993683207 · doi:10.1177/01939450022044638

Job Uncertainty and Health Status for Nurses During Restructuring of Health Care in Alberta

2000· article· en· W1993683207 on OpenAlexaffabout
Wendy L. Maurier, Herbert C. Northcott

Bibliographic record

VenueWestern Journal of Nursing Research · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicWorkplace Health and Well-being
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStressorRestructuringHealth careCoping (psychology)Cognitive appraisalPsychologyNursingContext (archaeology)Physical healthMedicineMental healthClinical psychologyPsychiatryPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Alberta health care system experienced dramatic changes after provincial funding cuts to health care from 1993 to 1996. As a result, stressors for nurses increased. The question of whether job uncertainty, working conditions, cognitive appraisal, and coping strategies influence the health of registered nurses in a context of health care restructuring was examined. Lazarus and Folkman's Transactional Model of Stress was used as the conceptual framework. A total of 271 registered nurses employed in a large, urban, acute-care teaching hospital responded to a self-administered survey questionnaire. Using multiple regression analysis, depression and self-reported physical health were analyzed. The data suggest that the threat of being placed on recall, having a coworker bumped or laid off, and perceived job security were adversely related to physical health. High primary appraisal of threat was associated with high levels of depression and poor physical health. In addition, the findings suggest that various coping strategies had both buffering and exacerbating effects on physical health and depression.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.218
Threshold uncertainty score0.439

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.100
GPT teacher head0.526
Teacher spread0.426 · 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

Citations51
Published2000
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWestern Journal of Nursing ResearchSame topicWorkplace Health and Well-beingFrench-language works237,207