P3‐372: Recruitment of nursing students into gerontological mental health nursing: Facilitating and constraining factors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite the number of older adults who are being hospitalized with mental health problems, including dementia, only a very limited number of undergraduate student nurses express the desire to pursue a career in gerontological mental health nursing once they graduate. The purpose of this pilot study was to explore what the salient facilitating and constraining factors were for this choice based on the perspectives of undergraduate students from one Bachelor of Nursing program in an urban Canadian setting. A major review of refereed journal articles pertaining to attitudes of student nurses perspectives about caring for older adults was done using CINHAL, Pub Med, Nursing Consult and Google Scholar. Based on our analysis of key themes of that literature, we developed a preliminary survey tool to administer to a self -selected (convenience) sample of 120 undergraduate nursing students in one Canadian University. The major facilitating factors affecting their choice of working with older adults once they graduated was a history of having a close relationship with a relative who was older, particularly one's grandparents, and a positive work environment. Salaries were not ranked as an important incentive. The major constraining factors affecting their choice not to work with older adults were primarily their fear of death of people with whom they had formed close relationships, and the anticipation of not being in a stimulating learning environment, particularly to be able to learn new skills that many new graduates seek. Although we are planning a more large-scale controlled study later this year, this small pilot study gives some support for current changes that should be explored, particularly in regard to increasing the content in the curriculum on the normal aging process, involvement of nurse leaders who are developing innovative programs in long-term care settings, and creative caring approaches that are helpful in enhancing the quality of life with older adults with mental health challenges, such as the use of music and related creative arts/expressive arts approaches.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.016 | 0.053 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.019 | 0.005 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".