Assessment of Continuing Education Needs Among Critical Care Nurses in Remote Québec, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This study analyzed the needs of critical care nurses in remote regions of Québec regarding continuing education (CE). METHOD: A web-based cross-sectional survey was conducted between May and June 2018. RESULTS: A total of 78 nurses completed the survey and reported their CE needs were not being met. Only 21.9% of participants reported a satisfaction level ≥ 6 on a scale of 1 to 10 regarding the offering of CE activities in their region. The most common factors identified as barriers to participation in CE activities were working hours (68.2%), distance and travel time (68.2%), released time to attend CE activities (65.2%), costs of CE activities (57.6%), and financial support (51.5%). CONCLUSION: This study provides insights into CE needs among critical care nurses. Shortcomings could be addressed by increasing CE activities in remote regions as well as the proportion of critical care-specific CE activities. Moreover, time and expense coverage should be offered by employers. [J Contin Educ Nurs. 2020;51(7):322-330.].
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".