MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2029346042 · doi:10.12927/hcq.2009.20665

Nursing Workforce Planning: The Key to Success

2009· article· en· W2029346042 on OpenAlexaffabout
Cheryl A. Smith

Bibliographic record

VenueHealthcare Quarterly · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGlobal Health Workforce Issues
Canadian institutionsOttawa Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWorkforceWorkforce planningEconomic shortageVariance (accounting)Nursing shortagePlan (archaeology)NursingKey (lock)Health human resourcesBusinessMedicineHealth careOperations managementNurse educationComputer scienceEconomicsEconomic growthAccountingGeographyGovernment (linguistics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the nursing shortage looming and planned growth, not only at the Ottawa Hospital (TOH) but within our region, TOH recognized the need to have a workforce plan that would accurately predict the number of nurses TOH would have to hire annually for three and five years. A review of the literature identified the key steps to take in workforce planning, but there were no models in existence to address the unique characteristics of nursing. A program logic model was used to develop the model and the evaluation framework for the accuracy of its predictions. This evidence-based workforce planning model has had a variance of lt; 5% for each of the past four years; the projected growth was accurately forecasted and has allowed TOH to be proactive in its recruitment initiatives.

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)0.025
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.057
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.135

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0250.057
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0050.006
Scholarly communication0.0120.008
Open science0.0020.008
Research integrity0.0040.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.004

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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.467
Teacher spread0.397 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations2
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealthcare QuarterlySame topicGlobal Health Workforce IssuesFrench-language works237,207