Perceptions and Representations of Senior Nursing Students about the Transition to Professional Life during the COVID-19 Pandemic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The COVID-19 pandemic caused disruptions in education systems worldwide. The suspension of face-to-face lectures and clinical placements directly impacted nursing students’ learning. This study aimed to identify the perceptions and representations of senior nursing students about the transition to professional life during the COVID-19 pandemic. This descriptive, observational, cross-sectional study used a web-based survey from a convenience sample of 162 senior nursing students, from nine different nursing schools. Data collection was carried out in the second quarter of 2020. Male students have more negative representations related to training (p = 0.048); working students have a better perspective of professional integration (p = 0.038); students who are in a relationship have a more positive perception of interaction with patients (p = 0.047); those who have already defined a service of choice have less insecurity and less fear of making mistakes (p = 0.043). Those who report anxiety about their first place of work have more negative representations about the future in other professional dimensions. The COVID-19 pandemic represents a frequent concern among students. However, it is a dimension that does not negatively contaminate other representations about the professional future. Overall, students showed concerns regarding their performance in providing direct care to the patient and lived up to their fellow nurses’ expectations.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".