Exploring Work–Life Issues in Provincial Corrections Settings
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Correctional nurses hold a unique position within the nursing profession as their work environment combines the demands of two systems, corrections and health care. Nurses working within these settings must be constantly aware of security issues while ensuring that quality care is provided. The primary role of nurses in correctional health care underscores the importance of understanding nurses' perceptions about their work. The purpose of this study was to examine the work environment of nurses working in provincial correctional facilities. A mixed-methods design was used. Interviews were conducted with 13 nurses and healthcare managers (HCMs) from five facilities. Surveys were distributed to 511 nurses and HCMs in all provincial facilities across the province of Ontario, Canada. The final sample consisted of 270 nurses and 27 HCMs with completed surveys. Participants identified several key issues in their work environments, including inadequate staffing and heavy workloads, limited control over practice and scope of practice, limited resources, and challenging workplace relationships. Work environment interventions are needed to address these issues and subsequently improve the recruitment and retention of correctional nurses.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it