Nursing Work Environment and Patient Outcomes in a Hospital Context
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aims of this study were to summarize the current state of knowledge regarding the relationship between nursing work environment (NWE) and patient outcomes and to identify gaps in the literature. BACKGROUND: There was an increased awareness of the impact of NWE on patient outcomes, in particular, related to safety and quality of care. METHOD: Scoping review was conducted. Studies published between 2002 and the 1st quarter of 2018 were included to provide an overview of the research on the associations between NWE and patient outcomes. RESULTS: Of 2238 titles and abstracts identified, 35 studies were included, and publication ranged from 2005 to 2018. All studies included were observational, 4 had a longitudinal design, and the remaining studies were cross-sectional. Evidence indicates that better NWE decreases the risk of patient adverse events and increases the quality of care. CONCLUSIONS: The associations between different dimensions of NWE and patient outcomes should be explored.
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 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".