MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Impact of Staff Nurse Empowerment on Person-Job Fit and Work Engagement/Burnout

2006· article· en· W2038681352 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueNursing Administration Quarterly · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicHealthcare Education and Workforce Issues
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBurnoutWork engagementEmpowermentPsychologyNursing staffWork (physics)NursingNurse AdministratorApplied psychologyMEDLINEMedicineClinical psychologyPolitical scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Workplace empowerment is an important strategy for creating positive nursing work environments in a time of a severe nursing shortage. The purpose of this study was to test a model linking staff nurse perceptions of empowerment to their perceived fit with 6 areas of work life and work engagement/burnout using Kanter's work empowerment theory. We tested the model in a cross-sectional correlational survey design with a random sample of 322 staff nurses in acute care hospitals across Ontario. Overall, staff nurses perceived their work environment to be only somewhat empowering. Fifty-three percent reported severe levels of burnout. Overall empowerment had an indirect effect on emotional exhaustion (burnout) through nurses' perceived fit in 6 areas of work life. The final model fit statistics revealed a good fit (chi2 = 32.4, df = 13, GFI = 0.97, IFI = 0.97, CFI = 0.97, RMSEA = 0.07). These findings have important implications in the current nursing shortage.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.801
Threshold uncertainty score0.654

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.373
Teacher spread0.340 · 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