Burnout and compassion fatigue in emergency care nurses: factors that influence development
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Emergency care nurses are highly susceptible to burnout and compassion fatigue. The aim of this study was to examine burnout and compassion fatigue in Irish emergency care nurses and the role of possible risk factors. A single method correlational design was employed comprising of quantitative data. Measures included; the Professional Quality of Life Scale (Stamm, 2009) which analysed compassion satisfaction and compassion fatigue (burnout and secondary traumatic stress), the Toronto Empathy Questionnaire (Spreng et al. 2009) and the Coping Self- Efficacy scale (Chesney et al. 2006). Purposive sampling acquired a sample (N= 70) of 61 females and 9 males. Findings indicate that Irish emergency care nurses are exposed to the risk of burnout and compassion fatigue. Exposure to secondary traumatic stress posed as a serious risk factor in the development of burnout and compassion fatigue while empathy, compassion satisfaction and coping self- efficacy where found to act as protectors against these criterion variables (burnout and compassion fatigue). Discussion, suggestions and limitations of the study are addressed.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".