Work readiness, transition, and integration: The challenge of specialty practice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: To determine how extended orientation enhances the work readiness of new graduate nurses as they transitioned to their professional role in a specialty care hospital. BACKGROUND: Given increased complexity of care and high-patient acuity, there is concern about the work readiness of new graduate nurses in specialty areas. DESIGN: Qualitative exploratory study using an inductive approach. METHODS: An integrative literature review was conducted to abstract characteristics of work readiness among new graduate nurses. Semistructured interviews were conducted with 41 participants from a large paediatric specialty hospital in Ontario, Canada, in 2014. The sample of nurses was stratified and included nurse managers, new graduates, and preceptors. Interview texts were interpreted using thematic analysis. RESULTS: A framework for enhancing work readiness of new graduates transitioning to specialty care was developed from the interview and literature findings. Interview data demonstrate an extended orientation that includes mentorship, a gradual increase in clinical responsibilities, and involvement in the professional role during the early stages of a nurse's career can enhance work readiness of new graduates. Four key areas of work readiness were identified in the literature: personal characteristics, clinical characteristics, relational characteristics, and organizational acuity. CONCLUSION: Based on the study results, new graduate nurses can be an integral part of the team in specialty care provided certain conditions are met during their transition to practice. Our study gives further evidence that extended orientation enhances new graduates' work readiness as they transit to their professional role.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".