MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2607245688 · doi:10.5430/jnep.v7n9p54

Reducing perceived stress through an orientation program for nursing students entering their first nursing course

2017· article· en· W2607245688 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Lisa L. Sparacino, B. Suzy Diggle

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Nursing Education and Practice · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicHealthcare Education and Workforce Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnxietyApprehensionNursingOrientation (vector space)PsychologyTrait anxietyStress (linguistics)Nurse educationMedicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: The faculty of an introductory nursing course noted that students expressed, over several years, apprehension regarding expectations such as studying for exams and how to better organize their time. Nursing students are known to experience a greater amount of anxiety than non-nursing students. This anxiety interferes with their ability to be successful in their selected major.Purpose and methods: The purpose of this study was to determine if an orientation program would reduce the perceived anxiety of students who have been admitted to their first nursing course, and of their families and significant others. Spielberger’s State-Trait Anxiety Questionnaire was administered to measure changes in stress levels before and after exposure to an orientation program designed for incoming nursing students and their significant others.Results and conclusions: The results indicated that the anxiety levels of the participants were significantly reduced after the orientation program. The results are important as a decrease in the anxiety levels of nursing students could be directly correlated to their success.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.134
GPT teacher head0.546
Teacher spread0.412 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations2
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Nursing Education and PracticeSame topicHealthcare Education and Workforce IssuesFrench-language works237,207