MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2991409038 · doi:10.1002/nop2.421

A comparative descriptive analysis of perceived quality of caring attitudes and behaviours between haemodialysis patients and their nurses

2019· article· en· W2991409038 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueNursing Open · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPatient-Provider Communication in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec en OutaouaisUniversité de MontréalUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung
KeywordsNursingScale (ratio)MedicinePerceived qualityDescriptive statisticsDescriptive researchFamily medicinePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aim: Despite its importance in nursing, perceived quality of the nurse-patient relationship has seldom been researched. This study sought to examine and compare the quality of caring attitudes and behaviours as perceived by haemodialysis patients and their nurses. Design: This comparative descriptive study involved 140 haemodialysis patients and 101 nurses caring for them in ten haemodialysis units in the French-speaking part of Switzerland. Methods: Participants completed a sociodemographic questionnaire and the Caring Nurse-Patient Interaction Scale (CNPI-70). Results: Both nurses and patients reported a high frequency of caring attitudes and behaviours. Patients gave higher ratings than nurses did on all the caring dimensions, except spirituality. Implications are discussed.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.117
Threshold uncertainty score0.990

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.397
GPT teacher head0.514
Teacher spread0.116 · 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