Factors Affecting Nurses’ Coping With Transition: An Exploratory Qualitative Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: One of the most important factors contributing to staff shortage is nurses' ineffective coping with transitions. Changes in nurses' official positions are usually associated with varying degrees of transition. Identification of affecting factors on nurses' coping in responding to transition can promote quality of nursing activity and prevent nurses' shortage. So the aim of this study was to explore factors affecting nurses' coping with transitions. METHODS: The participant of this exploratory qualitative study consisted of sixteen nurses that were work in medical wards of four hospitals in Qazvin, Iran. Data collected by semi-structured interviews. The data were analyzed by qualitative content analysis approach. RESULTS: The main theme of the study was 'inadequate preparation for transition'. This theme consisted of six categories including "staff training and development", "professional relationships", "perceived level of support", "professional accountability and commitment", "welfare services", and "nursing staff shortage". CONCLUSION: Nursing managers and policy makers need to pay special attention to the affecting factors on nurses' coping with transition and develop effective strategies for facilitating it.
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 | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".