The mediating effect of severity of client aggression on burnout between hospital inpatient and community residential staff who support adults with intellectual disabilities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: To compare exposure to client aggressive behaviour, perceived self-efficacy in managing this behaviour and burnout between community residential group home and specialised hospital inpatient staff who provide care for adults with intellectual disabilities (ID). To assess the mediating role of aggression exposure on burnout in these two staff groups. BACKGROUND: Aggressive behaviour is a common indication for admission to hospital so these staff typically experience more frequent and severe forms compared to staff working in the community. There have been mixed results in few studies examining burnout and perceived self-efficacy between these two groups. DESIGN: This study used a demographically matched sample of cross-sectional survey data from community residential group home and hospital staff who care for adults with ID in Ontario, Canada. METHODS: Exposure to aggression, perceived self-efficacy and burnout were compared for 42 matched pairs using descriptive statistics. A mediation analysis was used to examine the role of aggression severity in the relationship between care setting and burnout. RESULTS: Hospital staff were exposed to more severe client aggression and scored higher in emotional exhaustion (EE). There were no differences in perceived self-efficacy. Severity of aggression was a partial mediator of the higher EE among hospital staff. CONCLUSIONS: Exposure to more severe forms of client aggression among hospital staff contributes, at least in part, to them feeling more emotionally exhausted. This study contributes to further understanding exposure to aggression in these different settings and the impact it can have on emotional outcomes. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: There may be a role for policy and resource development aimed at reducing aggression and preventing or managing the associated emotional consequences. This is particularly true in hospitals, where aggression is most severe.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".