MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2681269930 · doi:10.5430/jnep.v7n11p44

Factors influencing intention to continue employment in Japanese hospital nurses working at tertiary emergency medical facilities

2017· article· en· W2681269930 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kanako Honda, Emiko Takamizawa

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Nursing Education and Practice · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicHealthcare Education and Workforce Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOrganizational commitmentNursingJob satisfactionPsychologyOrganisation climateMedicineSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: The study purpose was to investigate influencing factors related to nurses’ intention to continue employment in tertiary emergency medical facilities.Methods: A self-report questionnaire survey was conducted, and responses were collected by mail. We investigated seven factors associated with the intention to remain employed that were determined by preliminary research. Data were analyzed using a covariance structure analysis.Results: Of the 561 responses received, 461 were found to be valid for analysis. A model showing relationships among the five factors (organizational commitment, job stress, job satisfaction, nurse-physician collaboration, and intention to remain employed) was created. Organizational commitment and job stress were directly related to intention to continue employment, while, nurse-physician collaboration demonstrated effects on the entire model.Conclusions: The strongest factor observed was organizational commitment. The types of institutions examined in the present study almost exclusively treat seriously ill patients. This may explain why nurse-physician collaboration affected the entire model. In a tertiary emergency facility, a nurse can more easily play a critical role in the healthcare process. In the future, it will be important to consider these factors when creating an organizational climate conducive to continued employment.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.097
GPT teacher head0.453
Teacher spread0.356 · 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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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