MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the experiences of hepatology nurses in Canada

2021· article· en· W4205722208 on OpenAlexaffabout
Donna Zukowski, Anna DeWolff, Elizabeth Lee, Lesley Gallagher, Sarah De Coutere, Colina Yim

Bibliographic record

VenueGastrointestinal Nursing · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCOVID-19 and healthcare impacts
Canadian institutionsQueen Elizabeth II Health Sciences CentreHealth CanadaToronto General HospitalUniversity Health NetworkRegistered Nurses' Association of Ontario
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHepatologyMedicineOutreachPandemicCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Family medicineNursingInternal medicineHealth careHealthcare deliveryPublic healthQualitative researchDiseaseInfectious disease (medical specialty)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: In March 2020, COVID-19 was declared a global pandemic, directly affecting the management of liver disease. Aims: This study aimed to gain insights on the impact of COVID-19 on Canadian hepatology nursing care practices, on the personal stress levels of nurses and on strategies employed in the delivery of care. Methods: The 129 members of the Canadian Association of Hepatology Nurses (CAHN) were invited to an online survey, with a mixed-methods design consisting of 22 quantitative and seven optional qualitative questions. Findings: Of CAHN members, 41 (32%) responded to the survey; 90% reported moderate-to-severe negative impacts on practice settings, while 68% reported hepatitis C testing and treatment delays. The qualitative data identified six main themes within two broad categories: barriers in access to care and strategies employed by nurses. Conclusions: Participants identified that COVID-19 had negative impacts on themselves personally and on their delivery of healthcare to patients. Hepatology nurses led positive changes through collaboration with community partners and mobilisation of outreach work.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.097
Threshold uncertainty score0.991

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.083
GPT teacher head0.402
Teacher spread0.319 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGastrointestinal NursingSame topicCOVID-19 and healthcare impactsFrench-language works237,207