MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3177760782 · doi:10.1111/jonm.13422

‘The office of disaster management’ nurse managers' experiences during COVID‐19: A qualitative interview study using thematic analysis

2021· article· en· W3177760782 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Nursing Management · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicDisaster Response and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersUniversity of Calgary
KeywordsThematic analysisCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Nursing managementQualitative researchNursingNurse Administrator2019-20 coronavirus outbreakPandemicEmergency managementNurse managerSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)PsychologyMEDLINEMedicineSociologyPolitical scienceVirology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIM: The purpose of this study was to understand the experiences of nurse managers during the COVID-19 pandemic. BACKGROUND: There is a growing body of knowledge about the experiences of clinical nurses during COVID-19. However, there is less evidence about the experiences of nurse managers during the pandemic. METHODS: Eight nurse managers, from acute care and outpatient settings, completed semistructured interviews about how their roles had changed during the pandemic, how they felt about these changes, and what had gone well or been difficult. Each participant was interviewed once, for 20-60 min. We used thematic analysis methods to analyse the interview transcripts. FINDINGS: Nurse managers had to coordinate care in a context of uncertainty and guidance that changed frequently. Participants found that their roles and responsibilities either expanded to include more duties, or they were asked to take on a completely new role, with no orientation or training. Nurse managers were expected to provide support to their staff and patients, but did not necessarily receive support themselves. Participants were expected to plan simultaneously for care during the pandemic and for a return to normal working conditions. These factors contributed to challenging and difficult participant experiences of managing during COVID-19. CONCLUSION: Nurse managers' experiences during COVID-19 are influenced by changes to their roles and the support they received. Nurse managers continue to support high-quality care despite working a difficult context. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING MANAGEMENT: Where possible, nurse managers can be supported to extend their roles or receive additional education and support if they are required to take on new responsibilities. Nurse managers require support in order to be a resource for their staff.

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)0.004
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.878

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.178
GPT teacher head0.531
Teacher spread0.353 · 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