MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

14 Measuring the factors associated with the occupational wellbeing of nurses who provide palliative and end of life care

2018· article· en· W2801655032 on OpenAlexaff
KL Penz, Donna Goodridge, Laurie Hellsten

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth and Wellbeing Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPalliative careEnd-of-life careMedicineNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<h3>Introduction</h3> Despite the global strides made in palliative and hospice care, organisational challenges continue to negatively impact the accessibility to care and adequacy of pain and symptom management for patients and their family members. Nurses play a fundamental role in advocating for and providing high-quality palliative and end of life care, however, there is limited understanding of their occupational wellbeing. The purpose of this presentation is to explore the occupational resources and demands in palliative nursing practice through the development and psychometric evaluation of the Palliative Care Nursing-Job Resources (PCN-JR) Scale and Palliative Care Nursing- Job Demands (PCN-JD) Scale. <h3>Methods</h3> This study used a three-phase process of instrument development and psychometric evaluation within a province-wide cross-sectional design. Phase 1 involved a thematic analysis of qualitative data, palliative expert consultation, and a content validation index in the development of a 64-item PCN-JR Scale and 72-item PCN-JD Scale. Phase 2 consisted of a pilot survey of 55 nurses and use of item discrimination analysis to estimate internal consistency reliability and reduce the length of each scale. Exploratory factor analysis was used in Phase 3 to further test the modified scales in a province-wide survey of n=377 nurses who provide palliative and end of life care. <h3>Result</h3> Exploratory factor analysis of the 32 items related to palliative job resources favoured an 8-factor structure, accounting for 62% of the variance, Cronbach’s alpha 0.90. The 36 items related to palliative job demands favoured an 8-factor structure, accounting for 61% of the variance, Cronbach’s alpha 0.93. <h3>Discussion</h3> The Palliative Care Nursing-Job Resources (PCN-JR) Scale and Palliative Care Nursing- Job Demands (PCN-JD) Scale are valid and reliable, and have broad applicability to better understand the occupational wellbeing of palliative care nurses. Further research is necessary to further evaluate their psychometric properties from a national and international perspective.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.751

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.103
GPT teacher head0.425
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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHealth and Wellbeing ResearchFrench-language works237,207