Registered Nurses and Discharge Planning in a Taiwanese ED
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Published research on discharge planning is written from the perspective of hospital wards and community services. Limited research focuses on discharge planning in the emergency department (ED). The objective of this study was to identify ED nurses' perceptions of factors influencing the implementation of discharge planning. This qualitative study collected data from 25 ED nurses through in-depth interviews and a drawing task in which participants were asked to depict on paper the implementation of discharge planning in their practice. Factors influencing discharge planning were grouped into three categories: discharge planning as a neglected issue in the ED, heavy workload, and the negative attitudes of ED patients and their families. The study highlighted a need for effective discharge planning to be counted as an essential clinical competency for ED nurses and factored into their everyday workload. Nurses perceived that organizational culture, and parents' and relatives' attitudes were barriers to implementing discharge teaching in the ED.
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 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 | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it