MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2220095119 · doi:10.4236/ojn.2015.512113

The Nursing Documentation Dilemma in Uganda: Neglected but Necessary. A Case Study at Mulago National Referral Hospital

2015· article· en· W2220095119 on OpenAlex

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.

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Journal of Nursing · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicNursing Diagnosis and Documentation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReferralDocumentationDilemmaNursing documentationMedicineNursingFamily medicineNursing care

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Uganda, nursing documentation still remains a challenge, in most of the government hospitals and some private hospitals, it remains at a manual (non-technology driven) level and omissions have been observed. Nurses continue to capture standard elements in their documentation. A mixed methods intervention study was conducted to determine knowledge and attitudes of nurses towards documentation, including an evaluation of nurses' response to a designed nursing documentation form. Forty participants were selected through convenience sampling from six wards of a Ugandan health institution. The study intervention involved teaching nurses the importance of documentation and using of the trial documentation tool. Pre-and post-testing and open-ended questionnaires were used in data collection. The results from the close-ended questions were presented in the previous publication; the responses from the open-ended questions would then be presented. The open-ended questions regarding comments about the nursing documentation process and suggestions about the process of implementing the nursing documentation system in the ward units were considered. All participants were provided the opportunity to provide personal comments, reflections, or stories of their experiences with documentation in patient care. A thematic analysis approach was used during data analysis. The results showed that the participants had positive attitude towards documentation of patient care, but they had constraints limiting them to document, they reflected issues concerning the perceived pressure from the administra-G. M. Nakate et al. 1064 tions and support to document. The study findings have implication that there is need for organizational support and to have multisite studies and extension of the documentation tool.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.471
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
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 head0.081
GPT teacher head0.416
Teacher spread0.335 · 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