MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2906377051 · doi:10.1002/nop2.231

Predictors of new graduate nurses’ health over the first 4 years of practice

2018· article· en· W2906377051 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Heather K. Spence Laschinger, Carol Wong, Emily Read, Greta G. Cummings, Michael P. Leiter, Maura MacPhee, Sandra Regan, Ann Rhéaume‐Brüning, Judith A. Ritchie, Vanessa Burkoski, Doris Grinspun, Mary Ellen Gurnham, Sherri Huckstep, Lianne Jeffs, Sandra MacDonald‐Rencz, Maurio Ruffolo, Judith Shamian, Angela C. Wolff, Carol Young‐Ritchie, Kevin Wood

Bibliographic record

VenueNursing Open · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealthcare professionals’ stress and burnout
Canadian institutionsCancer Care South EastSt. Michael's HospitalCapital District Health AuthorityHealth CanadaRegistered Nurses' Association of OntarioLondon Health Sciences CentreMcGill University Health CentreWestern UniversityUniversité de MonctonVictorian Order of NursesUniversity of British ColumbiaAcadia UniversityFraser HealthProvidence Health CareUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of New Brunswick
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchHealth CanadaNova Scotia Health Research FoundationRegistered Nurses' Association of OntarioLondon Health Sciences CentreAlberta Innovates - Health SolutionsCapital Health
KeywordsMental healthLogistic regressionPsychologyRegression analysisClinical psychologyMedicineOccupational safety and healthOccupational stressPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIM: To examine predictors of Canadian new graduate nurses' health outcomes over 1 year. DESIGN: A time-lagged mail survey was conducted. METHOD: = 406) responded to a mail survey at two time points: November 2012-March 2013 (Time 1) and May-July 2014 (Time 2). Multiple linear regression (mental and overall health) and logistic regression (post-traumatic stress disorder risk) analyses were conducted to assess the impact of Time 1 predictors on Time 2 health outcomes. RESULTS: Both situational and personal factors were significantly related to mental and overall health and post-traumatic stress disorder risk. Regression analysis identified that cynicism was a significant predictor of all three health outcomes, while occupational coping self-efficacy explained unique variance in mental health and work-life interference explained unique variance in post-traumatic stress disorder risk.

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)0.006
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 score0.611
Threshold uncertainty score0.783

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.144
GPT teacher head0.519
Teacher spread0.374 · 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

Citations59
Published2018
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNursing OpenSame topicHealthcare professionals’ stress and burnoutFrench-language works237,207