Thinking, Feeling, Behaving
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This study examined the impact of the MINDBODYSTRONG ® program on mental health and lifestyle behaviors among a sample of staff nurses, clinical nurse leaders, and faculty, when offered after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. BACKGROUND: Previous studies have demonstrated the MINDBODYSTRONG program decreased anxiety and depressive symptoms, improved job satisfaction, and sustained healthy lifestyle behaviors in newly licensed RNs. This program has not been studied with experienced nurses. In addition, the use of a virtual format is unique. METHODS: A pre-post design was used for this pilot study. Subjects were recruited from a large Midwestern medical center and affiliated school of nursing. Registered participants of the MINDBODYSTRONG program attended 7 weekly sessions virtually. RESULTS: The MINDBODYSTRONG intervention suggests sustained improvement in perceived stress, anxiety, depression, and use of healthy behaviors. CONCLUSION: This pilot study supports that the MINDBODYSTRONG program may be effective in addressing mental health and healthy lifestyle beliefs for staff nurses, clinical nurse leaders, and nursing faculty.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".