How do nurse practitioners in acute care affect perceptions of team effectiveness?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: To describe how acute care nurse practitioners affect perceptions of team effectiveness. BACKGROUND: Acute care nurse practitioners provide safe and effective care to patients. There is limited evidence of the effects of acute care nurse practitioner roles on healthcare teams, and many of the findings are contradictory. Research is lacking to describe how nurse practitioners affect perceptions of team effectiveness. DESIGN: A descriptive multiple-case study undertaken in two university-affiliated teaching hospitals in Canada. METHODS: Data were collected from March-May 2009. Data sources included interviews (n = 59), time and motion study, non-participant observations, documents and field notes. Interviews were conducted individually or in groups using a semi-structured interview guide. Data were analysed within and across the cases to identify similarities and differences in perceptions of team effectiveness. RESULTS: Team members believed the nurse practitioners improved the team's effectiveness. They identified six team processes they believed were improved by the addition of the nurse practitioners to the teams. The processes included decision-making, communication, cohesion, care coordination, problem-solving and focus on patients and families. DISCUSSION: The study contributes to our understanding of how nurse practitioners affect perceptions of team effectiveness. Improved team communication and care coordination were believed to be particularly important. Nurse practitioner can facilitate patient- and family-centred care in healthcare teams. CONCLUSION: Nurse practitioners improve perceptions of team effectiveness. Further work is needed in different contexts and with patients and families to determine their perceptions of team effectiveness. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: The nurse practitioner role was believed to be particularly important to improve team communication and care coordination. This constitutes an added value of acute care nurse practitioners roles in healthcare teams. Nurse practitioner roles contribute to patient-centred care and can improve the quality and safety of the care provided to patients and families.
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 | 0.010 | 0.049 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".