MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4382049734 · doi:10.1080/23303131.2023.2226197

Organizational Outcomes of Supervision within Human Services: A Scoping Review

2023· review· en· W4382049734 on OpenAlexaff
Karen M. Sewell, Claire McMenemy, Margaret Janse van Rensburg, H. Robson MacDonald

Bibliographic record

VenueHuman Services Organizations Management Leadership & Governance · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Work Education and Practice
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCompetence (human resources)Human servicesHuman resourcesPsychologyKnowledge managementHuman resource managementJob satisfactionPeer reviewBusinessEmpirical researchManagementPolitical scienceComputer scienceSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Workplace-based supervision is positioned as a resource within human service organizations with the potential to enhance practitioner well-being and performance under stressful, demanding conditions. This article presents a scoping review synthesizing 175 empirical peer-reviewed publications between 2011 and 2021, including study characteristics, key concepts, methods, and outcomes examined. Providing a comprehensive perspective as its unique contribution, this review mapped the supervision outcomes across the international, multi-disciplinary human services literature. It generally reported the beneficial impact of workplace-based supervision, with notable positive impacts found for competence, implementation, job satisfaction, wellbeing, and retention. Our analysis provides support for workplace-based supervision as an organizational investment.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.619
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.009
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.153
GPT teacher head0.421
Teacher spread0.268 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations18
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHuman Services Organizations Management Leadership & GovernanceSame topicSocial Work Education and PracticeFrench-language works237,207