MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2973381157 · doi:10.11575/prism/37070

Registered Nurses and The Culture of Nursing Burnout in a Canadian Surgical Burn Unit

2019· dissertation· en· W2973381157 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Amy Nicole Tilley

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen MIND · 2019
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBurn Injury Management and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBurn outBurnoutNursingMedicineUnit (ring theory)Medical-surgical nursingPsychologyClinical psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Canadian health care system is facing critical nursing shortages resulting in extensive wait lists and diminishing quality of care due to, among other things, burnout and turnover of nurses. Burnout among nurses has traditionally been researched from an individualistic lens; in other words, the nurse experiencing burnout is studied. However, by researching burnout from a cultural perspective, I was able to learn about aspects of burnout that extend beyond individual nurses. In order to address nursing burnout, it is important to first obtain a thorough understanding of the role that the culture of organizations can play in allowing for burnout. Because individual problems or experiences happen within cultural contexts, they cannot be divorced from each other. In this thesis, I seek to inform this complex subject using an adapted ethnographic approach. This study took place on a surgical burn unit. Five registered nurse participants were observed and eight participants interviewed about their experiences of the unit, its culture, the demands they face, and their coping strategies. Data from ten observational shifts and eight semi-structured interviews, including interviews with key stakeholders, were analyzed. Participants all reported signs and symptoms associated with burnout which were also observed in daily practice. Interestingly, all participants expressed similar experiences of burnout indicative of a culture of nursing burnout within the unit. Varying reasons for this, both stated and observed, are explored in this thesis.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.887
Threshold uncertainty score0.273

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0240.009
Scholarly communication0.0050.001
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.328 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen MINDSame topicBurn Injury Management and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207