MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2484903990 · doi:10.5539/gjhs.v9n3p251

Development and Psychometric Relationship between Occupational Prestige and Social Health of Nursing Staff: A Cross-Sectional Study

2016· article· en· W2484903990 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Shahin Tohidi, Maryam Shoorvasi, Arezoo Shayan, Hassan Ahmadinia, Sedigheh Furohari

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Journal of Health Science · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicHealth and Well-being Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrestigeOccupational prestigeCross-sectional studyMedicineNursingPsychologyPopulationEnvironmental healthSocioeconomic status

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<p><strong>BACKGROUND: </strong>One of the features that any profession possesses is that it occupies a social status relative to other professions. The present paper contributes to the discussion on the relationship between nursing occupational prestige and social health.</p><p><strong>METHOD:</strong> This study was a cross-sectional research that was conducted in 2015. The study population consisted of 200 staff nurses working in all hospitals located in Hamedan, Iran. A convenience sampling was employed to select 200 nurses who were asked respond to the 25item Keyes’s Social Health Questionnaire and the16-item Nursing Occupational Prestige Questionnaire. Higher score reflected better social health and occupational prestige. The quantitative analysis of this study was carried out using the Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS).</p><p><strong>RESULTS:</strong> The results showed that the nurses’ mean score of social health and nursing occupational prestige were respectively 43.88±9.18 and occupational prestige44.83±25.14. Social health was significantly related to occupational prestige in the nurses (r=0.15, P=0.04). 66.5% of the nurses were reported to have average occupational prestige and 75.5% of them were believed to have average social health. There was a statistically significant difference in scores of the occupational prestige among the nursing post (P=0.01), job satisfaction (P<0.001) and job interest (P=0.007).</p><p><strong>CONCLUSION:</strong> Nurses’ social health deserves special attention. Effective social health promotion strategies should be considered for promoting their social health particularly in occupational prestige.</p>

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.077
Threshold uncertainty score0.861

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
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 head0.177
GPT teacher head0.499
Teacher spread0.322 · 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.

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

Citations5
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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