Perinatal nursing education for single‐room maternity care: an evaluation of a competency‐based model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the success of a competency-based nursing orientation programme for a single-room maternity care unit by measuring improvement in self-reported competency after six months. BACKGROUND: Single-room maternity care has challenged obstetrical nurses to provide comprehensive nursing care during all phases of the in-hospital birth experience. In this model, nurses provide intrapartum, postpartum and newborn care in one room. To date, an evaluation of nursing education for single-room maternity care has not been published. DESIGN: A prospective cohort design comparing self-reported competencies prior to starting work in the single-room maternity care and six months after. METHODS: Nurses completed a competency-based education programme in which they could select from a menu of learning methods and content areas according to their individual needs. Learning methods included classroom lectures, self-paced learning packages, and preceptorships in the clinical area. Competencies were measured by a standardized perinatal self-efficacy tool and a tool developed by the authors for this study, the Single-Room Maternity Care Competency Tool. A paired analysis was undertaken to take into account the paired (before and after) nature of the design. RESULTS: Scores on the perinatal self-efficacy scale and the single-room maternity care competency tool were improved. These differences were statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: Improvements in perinatal and single-room maternity care-specific competencies suggest that our education programme was successful in preparing nurses for their new role in the single-room maternity care setting. This conclusion is supported by reported increases in nursing and patient satisfaction in the single-room maternity care compared with the traditional labour/delivery and postpartum settings. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: An education programme tailored to the learning needs of experienced clinical nurses contributes to improvements in nursing competencies and patient 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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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".