MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2980450509 · doi:10.12927/cjnl.2019.25959

Role and Strategies that Managers can Apply to Support Point-of-Care Nurses’ Use and Adoption of Health Information Technology: A Scoping Review

2019· review· en· W2980450509 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Zohra Surani, Matthew John, Ana Laura Solano López, Victor Gbenro, Linda Slodan, Gillian Strudwick

Bibliographic record

VenueNursing leadership · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMobile Health and mHealth Applications
Canadian institutionsRegistered Nurses' Association of OntarioCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoint (geometry)NursingHealth carePsychologyKnowledge managementBusinessPublic relationsMedicinePolitical scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nurse managers play a significant role in the way care is provided by point-of-care nurses. Yet it is unclear what role nurse managers have in supporting nurses in using health information technologies (ITs) specifically. The objectives of this article are to (1) uncover the role of nurse managers in supporting point-of-care nurses to optimally use health ITs and (2) identify strategies that nurse managers can employ to support point-of-care nurses in using these technologies. A scoping review methodology was used, which resulted in the inclusion of 10 relevant articles. Concerning the role of the nurse manager, four themes were identified: (1) decision making, , (2) implementation planning, (3) supporting staff and (4) evaluation. With regard to strategies to support the use of health ITs, two themes were identified: (1) strategies that prepare nurse leaders in their role of supporting point-of-care staff in using health ITs and (2) strategies that directly support point-of-care staff in using health ITs. The results of this review will be of interest to nurse leaders, informatics researchers and nurse informaticians.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.561
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.310
GPT teacher head0.480
Teacher spread0.170 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations4
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNursing leadershipSame topicMobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207