Perceived Stress in Nurses: A Comparative Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to assess the perceived stress in nurses working in various departments including mental health and psychiatric nurses in Jordan and compare the all together.METHODS: Using a non-random convenience sample, 310 nurses working in various departments in Jordan representing five different hospitals were included. Nurses answered the Arabic Version of Perceived Stress Scale 10-Items Questionnaire (PSS10) and a Characteristic Checklist.RESULTS: This study showed that nurses working in psychiatric departments perceived the highest stress levels followed by oncology nurses (ONs), ICU/CCU, and ER nurses respectively. Medical and surgical nurses reported the lowest level of stress.CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that psychiatric nurses have the highest levels of stress among all participated nurses. This might lead to dissatisfaction with the work and high rates of burn out and turn over. All these factors can easily affect patients care and safety issue, especially psychiatric patients. It is highly recommended that nurse managers and policy makers pay a particular attention to this phenomenon and looking for causes of such high level of stress is important.
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 | 0.005 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".