MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2364786942 · doi:10.1016/j.ajic.2016.03.005

Point of care hand hygiene—where's the rub? A survey of US and Canadian health care workers' knowledge, attitudes, and practices

2016· article· en· W2364786942 on OpenAlex
Jane Kirk, Anson Kendall, James Marx, Ted Pincock, Elizabeth Young, Jillian M. Hughes, Timothy Landers

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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Infection Control · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfection Control in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsProvidence Health CareMarkham Stouffville Hospital
FundersGojo Industries
KeywordsMedicineHygieneFamily medicineHealth careNursingCompliance (psychology)Infection controlPsychologySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BackgroundHand hygiene at the point of care is recognized as a best practice for promoting compliance at the moments when hand hygiene is most critical. The objective of this study was to compare knowledge, attitudes, and practices of US and Canadian frontline health care personnel regarding hand hygiene at the point of care.MethodsPhysicians and nurses in US and Canadian hospitals were invited to complete a 32-question online survey based on evidence supporting point of care hand hygiene. Eligible health care personnel were in direct clinical practice at least 50% of the time.ResultsThree hundred fifty frontline caregivers completed the survey. Among respondents, 57.1% were from the United States and 42.9% were from Canada. Respondents were evenly distributed between physician and nurses. The US and Canadian respondents gave identical ranking to their perceived barriers to hand hygiene compliance. More than half of the respondents from both the United States and Canada agreed or strongly agreed that they would be more likely to clean their hands when recommended if alcohol-based handrub was closer to the patient.ConclusionThis survey demonstrates that similarities between Canada and the United States were more common than not, and the survey raises, or suggests, potential knowledge gaps that require further illumination. Hand hygiene at the point of care is recognized as a best practice for promoting compliance at the moments when hand hygiene is most critical. The objective of this study was to compare knowledge, attitudes, and practices of US and Canadian frontline health care personnel regarding hand hygiene at the point of care. Physicians and nurses in US and Canadian hospitals were invited to complete a 32-question online survey based on evidence supporting point of care hand hygiene. Eligible health care personnel were in direct clinical practice at least 50% of the time. Three hundred fifty frontline caregivers completed the survey. Among respondents, 57.1% were from the United States and 42.9% were from Canada. Respondents were evenly distributed between physician and nurses. The US and Canadian respondents gave identical ranking to their perceived barriers to hand hygiene compliance. More than half of the respondents from both the United States and Canada agreed or strongly agreed that they would be more likely to clean their hands when recommended if alcohol-based handrub was closer to the patient. This survey demonstrates that similarities between Canada and the United States were more common than not, and the survey raises, or suggests, potential knowledge gaps that require further illumination.

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)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.161
Threshold uncertainty score0.579

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.325 · 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