The experiences of chronically ill patients and registered nurses when they negotiate patient care in hospital settings: a feminist poststructural approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to understand the experiences of chronically ill patients and registered nurse in negotiating patient care in hospital. Specifically, we explored how social and institutional discourses shaped power relations and negotiation of patient care. BACKGROUND: Current literature indicates that although nurses embrace this notion, such partnerships are not easily implemented. Most existing studies focus on the role of the nurse as the leader of the partnership with little attention paid to how social and institutional values, beliefs and practices shape nurse/patient power relations; or how these relationships are negotiated between nurses and patients. DESIGN: The theoretical and methodological approaches used in this study are based on the precepts of Foucault and feminist poststructural theorists. METHODS: In depth interviews were conducted with eight chronically ill patients and 10 registered nurses. RESULTS: Both nurses and patients commented about the relationships that develop between nurses and chronically ill patients and how these relationships facilitate negotiation of patient care. Both parties described challenging moments and how institutional discourses may hinder positive negotiations of care. In this paper we highlight three themes that emerged: getting to know each other, they are not the sickest patients and finding time to listen. CONCLUSIONS: This study offers an innovative way of unpacking negotiation of care between chronically ill patients and registered nurses. It exposes how social and institutional discourses play a pivotal role in shaping negotiations between nurses and chronically ill patients. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Negotiating care with chronically ill patients is not as asymmetric as portrayed in some of the literature and tends to be based on mutual agreements between nurses and patients. Nurses make it a point to listen to patients' needs and resist institutional discourses that preclude them from spending time with patients.
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 | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 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".