MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Shift report: a ritual play on a residential adolescent psychiatric unit

2008· article· en· W2105256698 on OpenAlexaff
Olive Yonge

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicNursing education and management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUnit (ring theory)EmpowermentInsiderPsychologyEthnographyDemocracyPublic relationsSociologySocial psychologyPolitical scienceLawMathematics education

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The author conducted an ethnographic study of an adolescent residential psychiatric unit which revealed a category of behaviour--the shift report. A questionnaire was administered to staff to reveal further meanings. Reporting was found to schematize knowledge according to common referents, promote and validate insider roles through language, offer a means of personal reintegration and catharsis, and provide a forum for the symbolic enactment of democratic values which permeated every aspect of culture on the unit. Staff members were categorically in favour of their verbal and private shift report. There was little partitioning of informal and formal aspects of report in the interest of saving time. Instead, socializing and 'catching up' were important aspects of shift report and constituted a large part of team building. The informal nature of report, particularly in the use of language allowed staff to come to terms with frustrations rather than constituting patient stereotyping. As a ritual, the shift report fostered behavioural synchrony, individual empowerment and a democratic 'all-channel network' of communication. It is hoped that this account will encourage more practising nurses and managers to view their shift report as something more than a simple 'handover'; that is, a ritual play of core values, roles and relationships.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0100.009
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.327 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations18
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Psychiatric and Mental Health NursingSame topicNursing education and managementFrench-language works237,207