Newly Qualified Canadian Nurses’ Experiences With Digital Health in the Workplace: Comparative Qualitative Analysis (Preprint)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<sec> <title>BACKGROUND</title> Clinical practice settings have increasingly become dependent on the use of digital or eHealth technologies such as electronic health records. It is vitally important to support nurses in adapting to digitalized health care systems; however, little is known about nursing graduates’ experiences as they transition to the workplace. </sec> <sec> <title>OBJECTIVE</title> This study aims to (1) describe newly qualified nurses’ experiences with digital health in the workplace, and (2) identify strategies that could help support new graduates’ transition and practice with digital health. </sec> <sec> <title>METHODS</title> An exploratory descriptive qualitative design was used. A total of 14 nurses from Eastern and Western Canada participated in semistructured interviews and data were analyzed using inductive content analysis. </sec> <sec> <title>RESULTS</title> Three themes were identified: (1) experiences before becoming a registered nurse, (2) experiences upon joining the workplace, and (3) suggestions for bridging the gap in transition to digital health practice. Findings revealed more similarities than differences between participants with respect to gaps in digital health education, technology-related challenges, and their influence on nursing practice. </sec> <sec> <title>CONCLUSIONS</title> Digital health is the foundation of contemporary health care; therefore, comprehensive education during nursing school and throughout professional nursing practice, as well as organizational support and policy, are critical pillars. Health systems investing in digital health technologies must create supportive work environments for nurses to thrive in technologically rich environments and increase their capacity to deliver the digital health future. </sec>
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 | 0.005 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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".