Northern Ontario nurse practitioner job satisfaction and intent to leave: a constructivist grounded theory study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The current document is a three-paper dissertation exploring northern Ontario primary healthcare Nurse Practitioners’ (NPs) job satisfaction and intent to leave. The characteristics of NP job satisfaction and intent to leave are poorly understood. The broader work on NP job satisfaction and intent to leave has relied heavily on quantitative cross-sectional methods. I decided to use qualitative methods in order to seek deeper understanding of NP job satisfaction and intent to leave. The sample for this constructivist grounded theory study included 18 primary healthcare NPs working full time in primary healthcare in Northern Ontario. Telephone interviews were conducted and transcripts were analyzed. We found that primary healthcare NP job satisfaction was dependent upon a particular mix of “satisfiers”. These satisfiers included independence and interdependence, challenging work, quiet moments, and beginnings and endings. NPs experience dissatisfaction related to role recognition, geographical distances, overwork, and feeling overwhelmed. Key features were identified as contributors to primary healthcare NP intent to leave. These included inadequate remuneration, the lack of a provincial government pension plan, the quality of their relationships with management and administration and extended benefits programs. Among those considering leaving a primary healthcare NP position, key features of a new position would include adequate remuneration, generous extended benefits, and a shorter distance from home and practice sites. Some respondents intending to leave their current practice setting identified that they would be seeking work outside of NP practice. This study served to clarify key job features and processes related to job satisfaction and intent to leave among Northern Ontario’s primary healthcare NP population. A broader theory of NP job satisfaction and intent to leave emanated from the analysis of relationships among these key concepts within the study. The findings of this study could serve to inform initiatives to retain and recruit primary healthcare NPs within both rural and urban practice settings across northern Ontario.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.014 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".