MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2121845282 · doi:10.12927/cjnl.2006.18368

Workplace Empowerment, Work Engagement and Organizational Commitment of New Graduate Nurses

2006· article· en· W2121845282 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueNursing leadership · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicJob Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior
Canadian institutionsMinistry of Health and Long Term Care
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWork engagementPsychologyEmpowermentWorkforceBurnoutOrganizational commitmentEmployee engagementNursingEmotional exhaustionTest (biology)Structural equation modelingSocial psychologyWork (physics)Public relationsClinical psychologyMedicinePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As a large cohort of experienced nurses approaches retirement, it is critical to examine factors that will promote the engagement and empowerment of the newer workforce, allowing them to provide high quality patient care. The authors used a predictive, non-experimental survey design to test a theoretical model in a sample of new graduate nurses. More specifically, the relationships among structural empowerment, six areas of work life (conceptualized as antecedents of work engagement), emotional exhaustion and organizational commitment were examined. As predicted, structural empowerment had a direct positive effect on the areas of work life, which in turn had a direct negative effect on emotional exhaustion. Subsequently, emotional exhaustion had a direct negative effect on commitment. Implications of these findings for nursing administrators are discussed.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.179
Threshold uncertainty score0.667

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.127
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.151 · 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