Balancing professional and personal satisfaction of nurse managers: current and future perspectives in a changing health care system*
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The objectives of this research were to explore and describe emerging new roles of First-Line Nurse Managers (F-LNMs i.e. individuals who oversee the daily operations of nursing units, regardless of their titles) in one Canadian province, identify their requisite knowledge, skills, competencies, and determine the training and development needs of these managers. BACKGROUND: F-LNMs, recognized as key players in health care systems, face major challenges (e.g. continuing organizational change, lack of resources) daily. These challenges affect their ability to achieve quality work experiences for their staff members and quality of nursing care for their patients and for themselves. METHODS: The research design entails a triangulation of investigators (nursing and management), methods (interviews and a Delphi Study), samples (interviews with 26 F-LNMs and a Delphi Study with 62 panelists), and data (qualitative and quantitative). Institutions were randomly selected and then F-LNMs were randomly selected to participate in personal interviews and the remaining F-LNMs, along with nominated senior administrators, were invited to participate in the Delphi Study. RESULTS: Key findings relate to role changes (e.g. job enlargement and emphasis on efficiency), challenges (e.g. staffing and retention, frustrations), and recommendations for administrators (e.g. provide resources, training and development) and educators (e.g. link education to organizational needs). Ultimately, organizational changes and challenges affect how F-LNMs perceive their future professional (e.g. providing quality of patient care) and personal (e.g. high quality of life) satisfaction levels. CONCLUSIONS: This research suggests that the role of F-LNMs continues to evolve, consistent with the changing health care system. F-LNMs face challenges that compromise performance of their functions as they believe their work should be completed. To enhance satisfaction in their roles, F-LNMs express a desire for balance in their professional and personal lives.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".