MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2053367106 · doi:10.1097/nnd.0b013e31824b41a1

Quality of Work Life of Novice Nurses

2012· article· en· W2053367106 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal for Nurses in Staff Development · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealthcare professionals’ stress and burnout
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStaffingStressorNursingPsychologyAffect (linguistics)Economic shortageQuality (philosophy)Work (physics)Health careOrientation (vector space)Personality psychologyApplied psychologyMedical educationMedicinePersonalitySocial psychologyClinical psychologyPolitical scienceGovernment (linguistics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Brief This qualitative research study examines factors influencing the quality of work life of novice nurses (less than 2 years’ experience) in the Eastern Regional Health Authority in St. John’s, Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada. Although novice nurses are highly motivated to provide quality patient care, they encounter many sources of stress, including “difficult personalities,” inadequate orientation and mentoring, and horizontal violence from nursing and medical colleagues. These stressors are compounded by staffing shortages and heavy workloads. Supportive mentoring and adequate orientation are key factors to successful transition. In this article, the authors describe a study of novice nurses to determine sources of stress that may affect their transition into practice.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.296
Threshold uncertainty score0.623

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.138
GPT teacher head0.509
Teacher spread0.371 · 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