Final-Year Nursing Students' Experiences During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Scoping Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The transitional experience from final-year nursing students (FYNS) to newly graduated RNs (NGRN) challenges individuals' professional and personal identities. Multiple studies have documented the experiences of FYNS graduating in the pandemic, but no studies have synthesized the findings. Method: This scoping review examined the barriers and facilitators FYNS experience as they transitioned to become NGRN during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Databases were searched for relevant articles, and articles published in peer-reviewed journals between 2019 and 2021 that focused on the support of FYNS in clinical settings in North America, Europe, and Australia were included. Results: Three themes were identified: emotional turmoil and coping, clinical competence and readiness for practice, and teaching strategies. Conclusion: This review revealed important insight on how the pandemic affected FYNS' transition to practice and identified gaps in the literature for future research. [ J Nurs Educ . 2023;62(1):6–11.]
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 | 0.007 | 0.027 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".