MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2066942233 · doi:10.4236/ojn.2013.35050

Clinical supervision for novice millennial nurses in the perinatal setting: The need for generational sensitivity

2013· article· en· W2066942233 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Journal of Nursing · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicChild and Adolescent Health
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreUniversity of TorontoSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClinical supervisionWorkforcePerspective (graphical)Qualitative researchNursingMedical educationPsychologyMedicineSociologyPolitical scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper reports on a qualitative research study that examined the experience of expert and novice nurses participating in a new, reflective program of “clinical supervision”, intending to facilitate the transition of new graduate nurses into the workforce. Three patterns emerged during the constructivist inquiry: readiness to reflect, valuing of clinical supervision, and sustainability of the clinical supervision model. The researchers suggest generational sensitivity as a key perspective to consider when developing engaging workplace strategies for millennial nurses. The article offers recommendations for the implementation of clinical supervision and would be of interest to nurse leaders in a clinical setting.

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)0.006
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.616
Threshold uncertainty score0.922

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.001
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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.139
GPT teacher head0.510
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