Sources of Stress Among Undergraduate Nursing Students
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Stress is common among nursing students during their first years of study. Nursing students often experience high levels of stress because they frequently encounter various challenges that can negatively affect their academic performance and general health. However, common sources of stress among undergraduate nursing students have not been well identified. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to identify the common sources of stress among undergraduate nursing students. METHODS: This was a descriptive, cross-sectional study. The convenience sample included 87 female nursing students. The Student Nurse Stress Index (SNSI) was used to describe the sources of stress from four domains: academic load, clinical concerns, personal problems, and interface worries. RESULTS: The majority (95.4%) of the participants were aged between 19-21 years. The major source of stress was academic load (M = 3.38, SD = 0.82), followed by interface worries (M = 3.22, SD = 0.79), clinical concerns (M = 2.80, SD = 0.78), and personal problems (M = 2.43, SD = 1.02). CONCLUSION: The nursing students’ stress resulting from their academic load was higher than the other sources of stress, and it was related to the large number of materials, assignments, or subjects required for nursing students. It is recommended that undergraduate nursing students are supported by having schools organize the amount of academic work required for each subject. Given that the students’ academic load was the most common source of stress, coordination between the students and faculty about the requirements of each course is warranted.
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 | 0.005 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".