Determinants of the intention of elementary school nurses to adopt a redefined role in health promotion at school
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The quest for greater efficiency in the provision of primary healthcare services and the implementation of a "health-promoting school" approach encourage the optimal redefinition of the role of school nurses. School nurses are viewed as professionals who might be significant actors in the promotion of youth health. The aim of this study was to identify the determinants of the intention of elementary school nurses to adopt a new health-promotion role as a strategic option for the health-promoting school. METHODS: This study was based on an extended version of the theory of planned behaviour (TPB). A total of 251 respondents (response rate of 70%) from 42 school health programs across the Province of Québec completed a mail survey regarding their intention to adopt the proposed health-promotion role. Multiple hierarchical linear regression analyses were performed to assess the relationship between key independent variables and intention. A discriminant analysis of the beliefs was performed to identify the main targets of action. RESULTS: A total of 73% of respondents expressed a positive intention to accept to play the proposed role. The main predictors were perceived behavioural control (β = 0.36), moral norm (β = 0.27), attitude (β = 0.24), and subjective norm (β = 0.21) (ps < .0001), explaining 83% of the variance. The underlying beliefs distinguishing nurses who had a high intention from those who had a low intention referred to their feelings of being valued, their capacity to overcome the nursing shortage, the approval of the school nurses' community and parents of the students, their leadership skills, and their gaining of a better understanding of school needs. CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest that leadership is a skill that should be addressed to increase the ability of school nurses to assume the proposed role. Findings also indicate that public health administrators need to ensure adequate nurse staffing in the schools in order to increase the proportion of nurses willing to play such a role and avoid burnout among these human resources.
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 | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".