Aged over 50 years and practising: separation and changes in nursing practice among New Zealand's older Registered Nurses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: To describe temporary and permanent separation patterns and changes in nursing practice over 5 years, for the 2006 cohort of nurses aged ≥50 years in New Zealand. BACKGROUND: As ageing populations increase demand on nursing services, workforce projections need better information on work and retirement decision-making of large 'baby-boomer' cohorts. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort analysis using the Nursing Council of New Zealand administrative dataset. METHODS: A cohort of all nurses aged ≥50 years on the register and practising in 2006 (n = 12,606) was tracked until 2011. RESULTS: After 5 years, a quarter (n = 3161) of the cohort (equivalent to 8·4% of all 2006 practising nurses) was no longer practising. There were no significant differences in permanent separation rates between the ages of 50-58; between 18-54% of annual separations re-entered the workforce. On re-entry, 56% returned to the same clinical area. Annual separations from the workforce declined sharply during the global financial crisis and more of those leaving re-entered the workforce. In 2006, half the cohort worked in hospitals. After 5 years, the number of cohort nurses working in hospitals fell by 45%, while those in community settings increased by 12%. Over 5 years, weekly nursing practice hours declined significantly for every age-band. CONCLUSIONS: To retain the experience of older nurses for longer, workforce strategies need to take account of patterns of leaving and re-entering the workforce, preferences for work hours and the differences between the sub-groups across employment settings and practice areas.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".