MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408306626 · doi:10.1097/naq.0000000000000678

Addressing the Unique Challenges of a Statewide Nurse Transition to Practice Program

2025· article· en· W4408306626 on OpenAlexaff
Vicki L. Buchda, Dawna L. Cato, Karen Ofafa, Julie A. DeLoia

Bibliographic record

VenueNursing Administration Quarterly · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealthcare professionals’ stress and burnout
Canadian institutionsOntario Medical Association
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeneral partnershipWorkforceNursingCurriculumHealth careWork (physics)Workforce developmentBest practiceMedicineMedical educationPsychologyBusinessPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The post-pandemic healthcare landscape significantly impacted the professional nursing workforce by exacerbating existing challenges, including the academic-practice gap of new nurse graduates. Transition to practice (TTP) programs have been proven effective in supporting newly licensed registered nurses as they move into practice. A well-designed TTP program empowers new nurses to become resilient and competent, enhancing patient care and contributing to a healthier work environment. While these programs have been instituted throughout the country, most are in acute care settings, primarily in urban areas. The authors present a model for creating a transition to practice program designed to address the unique challenges faced in rural areas. The step-by-step process the Arizona Hospital and Healthcare Association (AzHHA) used to set up a statewide transition to practice program geared towards small and rural facilities and those serving the underserved is presented. The critical partnership with OpusVi, who was contracted for a customized curriculum to address the unique needs of hospitals, such as critical access and behavioral health is outlined. Finally, concrete actions that can be taken and a roadmap for program assessment are offered.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0050.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.124
GPT teacher head0.523
Teacher spread0.399 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNursing Administration QuarterlySame topicHealthcare professionals’ stress and burnoutFrench-language works237,207