MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4394936116 · doi:10.1016/j.soncn.2024.151626

Advanced Practice Nurses and Their Roles in Swiss Cancer Care: A Cross-Sectional Study

2024· article· en· W4394936116 on OpenAlexaff
Franziska Geese, Denise Bryant‐Lukosius, Sandra Zwakhalen, Sabine Hahn

Bibliographic record

VenueSeminars in Oncology Nursing · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicNursing Roles and Practices
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersZürcher Hochschule für Angewandte WissenschaftenBerner FachhochschuleUniversität Basel
KeywordsMedicineWorkforcePsychological interventionNursingCross-sectional studyFamily medicineDescriptive statisticsHealth careMEDLINE

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: To examine the advanced practice nurse workforce in Swiss cancer care and how their roles are being implemented (eg, role structures, processes) to achieve optimal outcomes for patients and their families, care organizations, and the broader health care system. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted. The sample included master-prepared advanced practice nurses in cancer care, who completed an online questionnaire from December 2021 to January 2022. Thirty-nine items assessed structures (eg, role characteristics, utilization), processes (eg, role activities, interventions), and perceived outcomes (eg, for patients, the health care system) of advanced practice nurses in Swiss cancer care. Data from closed questions were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Data from open-ended questions were organized and summarized into categories related to domains of advanced practice nursing and its reported frequency by the advanced practice nurses. RESULTS: The participating advanced practice nurses (n = 53), worked in half of the 26 Swiss cantons. Interventions were identified within nine categories, of which most were targeted to patients and their families (n = 7), followed by health care professionals (n = 2). Perceived positive outcomes were patient symptom management, length of hospital stay, and health care costs. Participants felt less confident in cancer care (eg, autonomous practice) and reported 15 professional development needs (eg, medical interventions, teaching). CONCLUSIONS: This study provides a comprehensive examination of 53 advanced practice nurses, detailing the characteristics of their roles and utilization across various jurisdictions and health care settings. The results highlight the diverse dimensions of advanced practice nursing and its potential to enhance cancer services and outcomes in Switzerland. Opportunities for role development support and expansion are identified. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING PRACTICE: More systematic health human resource planning is needed to expand the deployment of advanced practice nurses across jurisdictions, practice settings, and more diverse patient populations. Role development needs show the desire for specialized educational preparation in cancer care.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.331
Threshold uncertainty score0.760

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.530
Teacher spread0.492 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations6
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSeminars in Oncology NursingSame topicNursing Roles and PracticesFrench-language works237,207