MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3211297676 · doi:10.4102/hsag.v26i0.1688

Professional nurses’ perceptions regarding clinical competence of community service nurses in North West province, South Africa

2021· article· en· W3211297676 on OpenAlexaff
Kholofelo L. Matlhaba, Abel Jacobus Pienaar, Leepile Alfred Sehularo

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth SA Gesondheid · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicNursing education and management
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences North
FundersUniversity of South AfricaNorth-West University
KeywordsNursingPerceptionCompetence (human resources)North westMedicineMedical educationPsychologyGeographySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: South African Nursing Council requires nurses who successfully complete their training to perform a year of community service before obtaining registration as professional nurses (Regulation 425). Community service for health professionals was introduced as a strategy to retain newly qualified professionals within the country. The premise is that community service for newly graduated nurses gives them the opportunity to develop skills and acquire knowledge critical in their professional development. AIM: To explore and describe the perceptions of professional nurses as the supervisors of community service nurses (CSNs) during their 12 months of community service. SETTING: Selected hospitals of the North West province, South Africa. METHODS: A qualitative, exploratory and descriptive design was used. The study was conducted between September and November 2018 at three public hospitals in the North West province. Through purposive sampling, 15 professional nurses who supervise CSNs participated in the study. Data were collected in three focus group discussions using semi-structured questions. All focus group discussions were recorded and transcribed for analysis. Data were analysed using Pienaar's four steps of thematic analysis. RESULTS: Three themes emerged: perceptions of clinical competence, challenges impacting clinical competence and suggestions to improve clinical competence. CONCLUSION: It is suggested that even though the majority of CSNs were perceived to be competent and capable of working independently, they still required supervision and mentorship to refine their competency. Furthermore, the study reported similar challenges noted from previous studies that were perceived to be affecting CSNs' ability to deliver quality health care, and therefore recommendations for improvement were made. CONTRIBUTION: The study contributed to the developed the clinical competence evaluation tool which will be of benefit to the future community service nurses in the province.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.095
Threshold uncertainty score0.188

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.076
GPT teacher head0.405
Teacher spread0.329 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealth SA GesondheidSame topicNursing education and managementFrench-language works237,207