Preceptors’ Perceptions of Their Role in a Pediatric Acute Care Setting
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
BACKGROUND: This study explored preceptors' perceptions of the benefits, rewards, and supports associated with the preceptor role and their commitment to the role in a pediatric acute care setting. METHOD: A survey with a quantitative and semi-qualitative design was used. RESULTS: The survey was completed by 266 preceptors, who reported that their experience was mainly positive. They perceived the preceptor role as preparation for other leadership opportunities. The preceptors reported that they experienced pride in the role of preceptor and described the challenges they faced, such as workload and the need to adapt to different learning styles. Years of nursing experience and age were significant factors that influenced their perceptions of enjoyable aspects of the role and the types of support that they needed as preceptors. CONCLUSION: Preceptors perceived sufficient benefits and rewards to remain committed to the role and identified workload as a significant challenge. Further research is needed to explore whether additional supports or recognition tailored to level of experience and age may be beneficial.
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 | 0.001 | 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 it