Transition shock: the initial stage of role adaptation for newly graduated Registered Nurses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: The aim of this paper is to provide a theoretical framework of the initial role transition for newly graduated nurses to assist managers, educators and seasoned practitioners to support and facilitate this professional adjustment appropriately. BACKGROUND: The theory of Transition Shock presented here builds on Kramer's work by outlining how the contemporary new graduate engaging in a professional practice role for the first time is confronted with a broad range and scope of physical, intellectual, emotional, developmental and sociocultural changes that are expressions of, and mitigating factors within the experience of transition. DATA SOURCES: This paper offers cumulative knowledge gained from a programme of research spanning the last 10 years and four qualitative studies on new graduate transition. DISCUSSION: New nurses often identify their initial professional adjustment in terms of the feelings of anxiety, insecurity, inadequacy and instability it produces. The Transition Shock theory offered focuses on the aspects of the new graduate's roles, responsibilities, relationship and knowledge that both mediate the intensity and duration of the transition experience and qualify the early stage of professional role transition for the new nursing graduate. CONCLUSION: Transition shock reinforces the need for preparatory theory about role transition for senior nursing students and the critical importance of bridging undergraduate educational curricula with escalating workplace expectations. The goal of such knowledge is the successful integration of new nursing professionals into the stressful and highly dynamic context of professional practice.
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 | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".