MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The concept of readiness to change

2003· article· en· W2155933590 on OpenAlex
Cindy C. Dalton, Laurie N. Gottlieb

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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advanced Nursing · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicNursing education and management
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersCanadian Nurses FoundationMcGill University
KeywordsPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIM: Readiness is associated with change, yet there is little understanding of this construct. The purpose of this study was to examine readiness; its referents, associated factors and the resulting consequences. METHODS: In the course of nursing five clients living with multiple sclerosis over a 7-month period using a Reflective Practice Model, data were systematically gathered using open-ended and then more focused questioning. Data collected during 42 client encounters (28 face-to-face encounters; 14 telephone contacts) were analysed using Chinn and Kramer's concept analysis technique. Findings. The concept of readiness was inductively derived. Readiness is both a state and a process. Before clients can create change they need to become ready to change. A number of factors trigger readiness. These include when: (a) clients perceive that a health concern is not going to resolve, (b) a change in a client's physical condition takes on new significance, (c) clients feel better able to manage their stress, (d) clients have sufficient energy, (e) clients perceive that they have adequate support in undertaking change. When one or more of these factors is present clients become ready to consider change. The process of readiness involves recognizing the need to change, weighing the costs and benefits and, when benefits outweigh costs, planning for change. The desire to change and to take action determines clients' degree of readiness. When they experience a high degree of readiness they report less anger, less depression, and view their condition in a more positive light. In contrast, when they experience a low degree of readiness they report feeling depressed, afraid and vulnerable in the face of change. CONCLUSION: Nursing has an important role to play in creating conditions to support change. To fulfil this role, nurses need to be able to assess readiness for change and the factors that enable it and then to intervene in ways that facilitate readiness.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.934
Threshold uncertainty score0.269

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.319 · 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