MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Nurses’ autonomy: influence of nurse managers’ actions

2004· review· en· W2123430037 on OpenAlex
Majd T. Mrayyan

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advanced Nursing · 2004
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicNursing education and management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAutonomyWorkloadNursingUnit (ring theory)PsychologyPatient satisfactionMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Autonomy plays an important part in nurses' job satisfaction and retention, but the literature shows that they are often dissatisfied with this aspect and want better working conditions and greater autonomy in decision-making. AIMS: The aim of this study was to examine the role that nurse managers have in enhancing hospital staff nurses' autonomy. METHODS: The study used a comparative descriptive survey design. Data collection took place over the Internet through the use of selective listservs in the United States of America (USA), Canada, and the United Kingdom. Of the 317 hospital nurses participating, 264 (83.3%) were from the USA. Differences relating to nurses, nurse managers, and hospital settings were controlled in the analysis. RESULTS: Nurses were more autonomous in making patient care decisions than unit operational decisions, and they perceived their autonomy to be at a moderate level. Those who were autonomous in patient care decision-making were also likely to be autonomous in unit operation decision-making. Nurse managers' actions had a strong relationship with nurses' autonomy in deciding on patient care and unit operation decisions, and with total autonomy. The three important variables that were reported by staff nurses to increase their autonomy were supportive management, education and experience. The three most important factors that were reported to decrease nurses' autonomy were autocratic management, doctors and workload. DISCUSSION: Technical issues such as the availability of listservs, valid e-mails, viruses, and familiarity with the Internet and its applications were the major limitations of this study. Nurses' autonomy over patient care and unit operations decisions needs to be enhanced, and nurse managers should promote this. Similarly, there is a role for nurse education, both in preregistration programmes and in continuing education for managers. Further research needs to explore the barriers that nurses face in autonomous decision-making and how nurses' participation in unit operational decisions can be promoted. CONCLUSIONS: Hospital staff nurses have moderate autonomy which could be increased by more effective support from nurse managers. The use of electronic questionnaires is a promising data collection method.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.987
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.400
Teacher spread0.370 · 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