MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4213379793 · doi:10.37391/ijbmr.090407

A Phenomenological Study on Nurses' Perception of Compensation Received During Covid-19 Pandemic

2021· article· en· W4213379793 on OpenAlexaff
Dean Michael Aguon, Nam Phuong Le

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Business and Management Research · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCOVID-19 and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity Canada West
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPandemicPerceptionCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Compensation (psychology)Work (physics)IncentiveHealth carePsychologyMental healthBusinessInterpretative phenomenological analysisNursingPublic relationsQualitative researchMedicinePolitical scienceSocial psychologyEconomicsSociologyEconomic growthPsychiatryEngineeringDiseaseInfectious disease (medical specialty)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Covid-19 pandemic has created intense pressure on our society and the economy in many ways. Many industries were severely impacted, especially the healthcare industry. In this study, we conducted a qualitative phenomenological study to learn about the nurses' perception of their compensation during the pandemic. Since nurses are the critical front-line workers during the pandemic, it is vital to ensure their well-being in many aspects. Our study can help to improve the quality of the healthcare system at the same time, lower the turnover. During COVID-19, the nurses have been facing intense pressure on their mental health at work. Moreover, they believe that there should be more incentive in terms of financial and recognition for their work and receive more care from upper management.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0090.009
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.004
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 head0.292
GPT teacher head0.535
Teacher spread0.242 · 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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Business and Management ResearchSame topicCOVID-19 and Mental HealthFrench-language works237,207