MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4322096384 · doi:10.1177/23333936231155052

The Lived Experiences of Nurses Caring for Patients With COVID-19 in Arabian Gulf Countries: A Multisite Descriptive Phenomenological Study

2023· article· en· W4322096384 on OpenAlexaff
Husain Nasaif, Khaldoun Aldiabat, Muna Alshammari, Monirah Albloushi, Sumaya Mohammed Alblooshi, Shafeeqa Yaqoob

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Qualitative Nursing Research · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCOVID-19 and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsCape Breton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContext (archaeology)Descriptive researchPsychological resiliencePandemicLived experienceHealth carePhenomenology (philosophy)Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Interpretative phenomenological analysisHermeneutic phenomenologyPsychologyNursingHealthcare systemMedicineQualitative researchSociologyPolitical scienceGeographySocial psychologySocial scienceDiseasePsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, several studies worldwide have explored nurses' experiences of caring for COVID-19 patients in various healthcare settings. However, these studies were conducted in context, culture, and healthcare systems that differ greatly from the Arabian Gulf context. This descriptive phenomenological study aimed to understand nurses' lived experiences caring for patients diagnosed with COVID-19 in Arabian Gulf countries. Individual virtual interviews were conducted with 36 nurses from five countries and were analyzed using Giorgi's methodology. Four main themes were identified: (1) living with doubts, (2) living through the chaos of challenges, (3) moving toward professional resilience, and (4) reaching the maximum level of potential. The findings from this study hopefully will guide health organizations in this region in developing strategies and policies to support and prepare nurses for future outbreaks.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.771

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
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 head0.346
GPT teacher head0.600
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 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

Citations7
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobal Qualitative Nursing ResearchSame topicCOVID-19 and Mental HealthFrench-language works237,207