Operating Room Culture and Interprofessional Relations
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this article is to describe interprofessional relations in order to better understand their impact on nurse retention, while considering the operating room culture and its specific context. A focused ethnography was performed between September and October 2017 at a university hospital in an urban center in the province of Quebec, Canada. This was a secondary analysis of 11 nurses' semistructured one-on-one interviews. Additional data were collected through 6 days of observations, informal conversations, field notes, and a journal. A thematic analysis followed. Interprofessional relations and the need for recognition are important for nurse retention. In addition, a nurse's personality appears to be an important aspect in the complex and specific context of the operating room. Nurse retention in the operating room is multifactoral, and like the need for recognition, interprofessional relations are important issues. Interventions to improve working relationships, recognition of nurses, and consideration of a nurse's personality during hiring appear to be promising avenues for improving retention in the operating room.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it