MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3211471862 · doi:10.33137/utjph.v2i2.37004

Nurses Perceptions of the Utilization of the Violence Assessment Tool (VAT) in Northeastern Ontario

2021· article· en· W3211471862 on OpenAlex
Oghenefego Akpomi-Eferakeya, Judith Horrigan, Roberta Heale, Emily Donato

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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of Toronto Journal of Public Health · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicWorkplace Violence and Bullying
Canadian institutionsUniversity of SudburyLaurentian University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWorkplace violenceFocus groupOccupational safety and healthHealth careNursingMedicineSuicide preventionHuman factors and ergonomicsPoison controlPsychologyMedical emergencyBusinessPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Workplace violence (WPV) is an ongoing problem in health care. Most of the cases of WPV are caused by the patients, patients’ families, and friends. Violence in hospitals among registered nurses has led to 56% of lost time injuries, and in 2018, Ontario’s Workplace Safety and Insurance Board (WSIB) reported 13% of lost time injuries due to WPV. The Public Services Health and Safety Association (PSHSA) created the Violence Assessment Tool [VAT] to predict the possible risk of violence from patients in acute care settings. Health care workers can use the VAT to assess risk, apply possible control measures and improve their safety. As part of a larger study, the aim of this research is to explore nurses’ perceptions of the utilization of the VAT in assessing the potential risk of violence, and to identify any gaps, challenges, or improvements needed in the VAT. An Interpretive Description research design by Sally Thorne in (2016) will be used. The model that will guide this study is the Haddon Matrix framework of workplace violence prevention. The study will involve three focus groups via zoom virtual meetings with 6 to 8 participants per session, and an expected total of 18-24 participants. Focus group interviews will use semi-structured questions to guide the discussion among nurses working in a Northeastern Ontario hospital. Interpretive description data analysis will be guided by Thorne’s processes of data analysis. This will be the first study to examine nurses’ perceptions of the VAT in Ontario. The findings of this study will help to determine the predictive validity of the VAT and any potential changes that may be needed. The findings of this study could lead to reduced violence and associated costs within the healthcare sector.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.575
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.277 · 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