MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2275745154 · doi:10.5539/gjhs.v8n10p65

Assessment of Predictable Productivity of Nurses Working in Kerman University of Medical Sciences’ Teaching Hospitals via the Dimensions of Quality of Work Life

2016· article· en· W2275745154 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Fariba Borhani, Azizollah Arbabisarjou, Toktam Kianian, Saman Saber

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Journal of Health Science · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicHealth and Well-being Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProductivityWork (physics)Quality (philosophy)Work productivityMedical educationNursingPsychologyMedicineSociologyEngineeringMechanical engineeringEconomic growth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Despite the existence of a large community of nurses, specific mechanisms have not been developed yet to consider their needs and the quality of their work life. Moreover, few studies have been conducted to analyze the nature of nursing, nursing places or nurses' quality of work life. In this regard, the present study aimed to assess predictable productivity of nurses working in Kerman University of Medical Sciences' teaching hospitals via the dimensions of Quality of Work Life. METHODOLOGY: The present descriptive-correlational study was conducted to assess predictable productivity of nurses via the dimensions of Quality of Work Life. The study's population consisted of all nurses working in different wards of teaching hospitals associated with Kerman University of Medical Sciences. Out of the whole population, 266 nurses were selected based on the simple random sampling method. To collect data, the questionnaires of 'Quality of Nursing Work Life' and 'Productivity' were used after confirming their reliability (test-retest) and content validity. Finally, the collected data were analyzed through the SPSS software (version 16). RESULTS: Although the quality of work life for nurses was average and their productivity was low but the results showed that quality of life is directly related to nurses' productivity. Quality of life and its dimensions are predictive factors in the in the nurses' productivity. CONCLUSIONS: It can conclude that by recognizing the nurses' quality of work life situation, it can realize this group productivity and their values to the efficiency of the health system. For the quality of working life improvement and increasing nurses' productivity more efforts are needed by authorities. The findings can be applied by managers of hospitals and nursing services along with head nurses to enhance the quality of health services and nursing profession in general.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.433
Teacher spread0.381 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations21
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobal Journal of Health ScienceSame topicHealth and Well-being StudiesFrench-language works237,207