The Social Determinants of Nursing Retention in a Pediatric Hematology/Oncology Unit
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pediatric hematology/oncology units (PHOUs) are highly paced, stressful environments and can be difficult areas to work. Thus, these units can present issues when it comes to both recruiting and retaining health care professionals (HCPs). There is scant research addressing how the environment of a PHOU contribute to a HCP's desire to stay or leave this environment. To conduct this project, a critical ethnographic approach was used. The researcher conducted semistructured interviews ( n = 29), which included nurses ( n = 21), physicians ( n = 4), and allied health care staff ( n = 4). This sample represented approximately one third of staff in each category. Participants identified that their ability to develop long-term relationships with children and families as a significant source of satisfaction. Belonging to the oncology team was seen as extraordinarily important to all the participants. The majority of the participants also felt that working in this ever-evolving dynamic medical field afforded them with ongoing learning opportunities. The main frustration described by participants pertained to administrative involvement in the everyday workings of the PHOU, potentially leading to attrition. It is important to note that there was also diversity among and between the categories of HCPs when describing the work environment and the issues that most influence them. While similarities among participants were found between satisfaction and dissatisfaction, significant differences between them led us to believe it would be unreasonable to attempt to compare the three groups here. Thus, in this article the author focused primarily on nursing while noting related observations from physicians and allied health professions.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".