Nurses' perceived and actual caregiving roles: identifying factors that can contribute to job satisfaction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: To compare nurses' caring expectations with their caregiving experiences and to identify factors that could potentially be included in a preliminary conceptual model of job satisfaction and compassion fatigue. BACKGROUND: Nurses often report emotional reward and satisfaction in their profession from compassionately caring for sick and injured patients. However, being in close proximity to trauma can eventually deplete a nurse's compassion and empathy for the patients they care for. This loss of compassion is further exacerbated by demanding work environments that involve administrative duties, attending to patients' psychosocial needs and interacting with patients' families. To date, the literature has tended to focus on pathology of compassion fatigue, rather than identifying its contributing factors. DESIGN: A grounded theory approach was used to identify emerging themes in nurses' accounts of their caregiving roles. METHODS: Open-ended interviews were conducted with nurses (n = 9) who were employed by a maritime district health authority for a minimum of five years. Interviews focused on beliefs of how to provide care, perceived caregiving responsibilities and perceived challenges in the provision of care. RESULTS: Emerging from the data is a proposed model of job satisfaction. The concepts of monitoring and patient advocacy appeared to be key components in reported satisfaction or alienation. Discrepancies were found between care expectations outlined by management and nurses' perceptions of care provision. Additionally, type of nursing education was related to nurses' confidence in applying nursing skills. CONCLUSIONS: These findings have implications for training programmes, hospital management and quality of patient care. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: It is important to identify factors that could explain resilience to compassion fatigue because compassion fatigue has negative consequences not only for nurses themselves but for the patients in their care.
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 | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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".