MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2468804696 · doi:10.3917/rsi.125.0084

Évaluation et intervention en matière de climat psychologique de travail chez le personnel infirmier : une revue de la littérature

2016· article· fr· W2468804696 on OpenAlexaff
Stéphanie Maillet, François Courcy, Jeannette Leblanc

Bibliographic record

VenueRecherche en soins infirmiers · 2016
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicJob Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior
Canadian institutionsUniversité de SherbrookeUniversité de Moncton
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPsychologyPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cette revue de littérature a pour thème central l’influence du climat psychologique de travail et de la satisfaction au travail sur l’intention de quitter chez les infirmières. Plus spécifiquement, il s’agit d’abord d’exposer l’influence des dimensions du climat psychologique de travail, soit les perceptions liées à la nature de l’emploi, au rôle professionnel, à la qualité du leadership , à la qualité de l’équipe de travail ainsi qu’à l’organisation dans son ensemble, sur l’intention de quitter l’organisation ainsi que la profession chez les infirmières. Ensuite, il s’agit de mettre en évidence le rôle médiateur potentiel de la satisfaction au travail dans l’explication du mécanisme par lequel un individu passe d’une perception défavorable des dimensions du climat psychologique de travail aux intentions de quitter. Ce travail se termine sur une recension des pratiques d’évaluation et d’intervention qui pourraient favoriser le succès des démarches d’amélioration du climat psychologique et de la satisfaction au travail auprès des infirmières.

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 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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.425
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.281 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations3
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRecherche en soins infirmiersSame topicJob Satisfaction and Organizational BehaviorFrench-language works237,207