MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3163049528 · doi:10.1080/13561820.2021.1890006

The role of gender, profession and informational role self-efficacy in physician–nurse knowledge sharing and decision-making

2021· article· en· W3163049528 on OpenAlexafffund
François Durand, Ivy Lynn Bourgeault, Robin Lewis Hebert, Marie‐Josée Fleury

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Interprofessional Care · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPatient-Provider Communication in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityDouglas Mental Health University InstituteUniversity of Ottawa
FundersFonds de Recherche du Québec - Santé
KeywordsConstruct (python library)Self-efficacyAffect (linguistics)MediationPsychologyHealth careNursingSample (material)MedicineSocial psychologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While gender and professional status influence how decisions are made, the role played by health care professionals' informational role self-efficacy appears as a central construct fostering participation in decision-making. The goal of this study is to contribute to a better understanding of how gender and profession affect the role of self-efficacy in sharing expertise and decision-making. Validated questionnaires were answered by a cross-sectional sample of 108 physicians and nurses working in mental health care teams. A moderated mediation analysis was performed. Results reveal that the impact of sharing knowledge on informational role self-efficacy is negative for nurses. Being a nurse negatively affects the relation between informational role self-efficacy and participating in decision-making. Informational role self-efficacy is also a strong positive predictor of participation in decision-making for male physicians but less so for female physicians.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.475
Threshold uncertainty score0.698

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.422
Teacher spread0.372 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations24
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Interprofessional CareSame topicPatient-Provider Communication in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207