The Experiences of Preceptors with New Graduate Nurses in Inpatient Units
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: To effectively retain and transition the new graduate nurse into the workforce, inpatient units rely heavily on the support and commitment of preceptors. While the preceptorship experience of new graduate nurses is greatly examined in the literature, little attention has been paid to understanding this process from the point of view of the preceptor. Objective: This study sought to explore the experience of precepting newly minted professional nurses on medical-surgical units. By uncovering patterns across nurses’ experiences in navigating the preceptor role, this study aimed to raise the visibility of preceptors and their supportive needs around the preceptorship period. Methods: For this qualitative descriptive study, semi-structured face-to-face interviews were conducted with ten nurse preceptors of a university teaching hospital in Montreal, Canada. Although this study sought to recruit participants from two medical and two surgical inpatient units, no surgical nurses expressed interest in participating. Results: Findings indicate that the experience of precepting new graduate nurses is driven and shaped by an unvarying sense of accountability in the workplace. Preceptors are focused on ensuring the safety of patients, the new graduate nurse, and the unit by assuming concomitant roles. Nurses also report having to constantly adapt according to the neophyte's confidence and competence. Preceptors also report navigating the role by relying on various sources of knowledge, namely their own experiences as new graduate nurses, their colleagues, and skills acquired beyond the nursing domain. Findings also indicate that precepting new graduate nurses prompts nurses to reflect upon their confidence and their competence in undertaking the role. Conclusion: Findings from this study can be used to develop preceptor programs that enhance the preceptorship experience for preceptors and improve the onboarding process for both new graduate nurses and preceptors. This study also provides a starting point for critical reflection and discussion about the role of preceptorship in enhancing the professional identity of nurses.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".