MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4406759553 · doi:10.2196/64970

Evaluation of the Transition-to-Practice Arrangements for Novice Perioperative Nurses: Protocol for a Mixed Methods Study

2025· article· en· W4406759553 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Nick Nijkamp, Pauline Calleja, Ashlyn Sahay, Leanne Jack

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicNursing education and management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCentaur Memorial Fund for Nurses
KeywordsApprehensionProtocol (science)NursingMedical educationPsychologyMedicineAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Transitioning into the first year of clinical practice as a nurse or changing specialties in the nursing career presents a critical phase for novice nurses characterized by excitement, apprehension, and the phenomenon of "transition shock." Within perioperative nursing, this transition phase takes on distinctive challenges. However, there is a lack of empirical evidence on transition programs and arrangements. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the current transition-to-practice (TTP) arrangements available to new graduate and novice nurses within Australian perioperative nursing settings. METHODS: This study uses an exploratory mixed-method, multilevel triangulation with a sequential phase design to address 4 research questions. Phases 1 to 3 will use document analysis, surveys, and semistructured interviews to establish the findings of the research questions. Phase 4 will use meta-inference and triangulation to aggregate and analyze the data from all preceding phases. These findings will be the foundation for developing a framework to inform future TTP arrangements. This robust framework will embed empirical evidence, existing literature, and sound learning and teaching pedagogy. Results emerging from this study will be reported using the Good Reporting of Mixed Methods Study guidelines. RESULTS: This project received approval in June 2023. Following this, Human Research Ethics Committee approval was sought for phases 1 and 2, and recruitment began. As of August 2024, phase 1 has collected 50 responses and phase 2 has collected 69 responses. Data collection for phase 3 is projected to commence in May 2025 once data from phases 1 and 2 have been analyzed. Phase 4 is projected to occur in 2026. Each phase is anticipated to have a results manuscript submitted for publication once data are analyzed and written up. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this study will provide an in-depth exploration of TTP arrangements within perioperative nursing in Australia and provide a framework to guide the future development of TTP arrangements. TRIAL REGISTRATION: OSF Registries osf.io/zm432; https://osf.io/54s36. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/64970.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.122
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.095
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.122
Threshold uncertainty score0.645

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1220.095
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.005
Bibliometrics0.0050.005
Science and technology studies0.0060.004
Scholarly communication0.0050.005
Open science0.0050.004
Research integrity0.0060.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0460.015

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 head0.359
GPT teacher head0.699
Teacher spread0.340 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research Protocols→Same topicNursing education and management→French-language works237,207→