Canadian Hospital and Home Visiting Nurses’ Attitudes Toward Families in Transitional Care: A Descriptive Comparative Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite the key role that hospital and home care nurses have in supporting family carers in transitional care, there is limited comparative information on their attitudes toward supporting family carers during care transitions. As part of a larger research project, we conducted a descriptive comparative study using a cross-sectional survey. Canadian nurses (105 hospital, 34 home visiting) completed a demographic questionnaire and the Families' Importance in Nursing Care-Nurses' Attitudes (FINC-NA) measurement tool. There were no statistically significant differences between hospital and home visiting nurses' attitudes, which were positive about including families in care. Nurses who reported having a workplace philosophy or general approach to the care of family held more positive attitudes toward families than those who did not. This is important because positive attitudes are often linked to better communication with family carers and thus, better patient and carer outcomes. To our knowledge, only one Canadian master's thesis has used this tool. Thus, this research furthers understanding of nurse attitudes within a Canadian context. Furthermore, this article adds to the literature by including suggestions for future research that are based in social psychological theories. Interdisciplinary knowledge can help pre- and postlicensure clinicians in advanced family nursing to better lever barriers and facilitators within family nursing practice.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".