Determining the Relationship Between Perceptions of the Nursing Profession and Attitudes towards Career Future of Nursing Senior Students: An Observational Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study was conducted to examine the relationship between nursing senior students' perceptions of the nursing profession and their attitudes toward their career future and to determine the factors affecting their career plans. The universe of the descriptive and relation-seeking study consisted of 143 senior students studying at the nursing department of a university. The study was completed with 105 students who met the inclusion criteria and agreed to participate. It was determined that CFI scores differed significantly according to the gender of the students, their readiness for the profession and the post-graduate employment statute. It was determined that there was a significant positive correlation between the CFI scale total score, career adaptability, career optimism sub-dimensions and the total score of PNPS. Also, it was determined that the sub-dimensions of age, gender, post-graduation work plan and PNPS were the variables explaining the students' career plans at 56%. It was determined that students' perceptions of the statute and the quality of the nursing profession were factors affecting their career plans. For this reason, it should be aimed to develop a positive professional perception by providing students with professional values for the profession throughout nursing education.
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 | 0.006 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".