MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408285808 · doi:10.1097/ncq.0000000000000851

Enhancing Staffing Stability in Long-Term Care

2025· article· en· W4408285808 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jen Calver, Farazana Rahmen, Nitha Reno, Winnie Sun

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Nursing Care Quality · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGeriatric Care and Nursing Homes
Canadian institutionsRegional Municipality of DurhamOntario Tech University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStaffingLong-term careNursingNurse AdministratorQuarter (Canadian coin)Organizational culturePsychologyMedicineMEDLINEPublic relations

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Challenges to recruit and retain nurses and personal support workers (PSWs) within the long-term care (LTC) sector is a significant problem. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to describe elements of recruitment and retention from staff perspectives. METHODS: Secondary analysis of survey data (n = 93) was conducted utilizing data collected from nurses and PSWs from 4 LTC homes. Open-ended responses were summarized, coded, and analyzed thematically. RESULTS: Findings indicated that nearly a quarter of participants (24.7%) had no intention to stay in their current job. Three key themes emerged as organizational factors for staffing stability including resident care as a top priority, rebuilding a healthy workplace, and open communication and professional development. CONCLUSION: The growing focus on recruitment and retention in LTC reflects its prevalence. It is therefore important to understand staff perspectives related to organizational factors that may impact staffing stability efforts, and ultimately resident 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.116
Threshold uncertainty score0.893

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.493
Teacher spread0.421 · 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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Nursing Care QualitySame topicGeriatric Care and Nursing HomesFrench-language works237,207