MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1997063093 · doi:10.1097/ncq.0b013e3181b1f41e

Relationships Between Processes and Outcomes of Nurse Practitioners in Acute Care

2010· article· en· W1997063093 on OpenAlexaff
Souraya Sidani, Diane Doran

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Nursing Care Quality · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicNursing Roles and Practices
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAcute careNursingMEDLINENursing careMedicineOutcome (game theory)Nursing Outcomes ClassificationPsychologyFamily medicinePrimary nursingNurse educationHealth care

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This nonexperimental repeated-measure study examined the relationships between processes (coordination of care, and provision of counseling and education) and outcomes (symptom resolution, functional status, and satisfaction with care) expected of acute care nurse practitioners (ACNPs). The data were obtained from 320 patients admitted to medical, surgical, and cardiac units. The results indicated positive association between the process and outcome variables, providing initial evidence delineating care processes of ACNPs that contribute to the achievement of nursing-sensitive outcomes.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.163
Threshold uncertainty score0.826

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.127
GPT teacher head0.535
Teacher spread0.408 · 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 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

Citations25
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Nursing Care QualitySame topicNursing Roles and PracticesFrench-language works237,207