MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4411656773 · doi:10.51847/c1rbu54flh

10.51847/c1rbU54fLh

2000· article· en· W4411656773 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueTime to knit · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicEthics in medical practice
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of ZanjanZanjan University of Medical Sciences
KeywordsIntensive careEmergency medical careMedical educationNursingPsychologyMedicineMedical emergencyEmergency medical servicesIntensive care medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: Job stress is one of the most important sources of stress for human beings; Nursing profession has gained considerable attention in this regard.One of these stresses is the moral distress.The present study intended to evaluate the moral distress of nurses working in the emergency departments and intensive care units of the medical education centers affiliated with Zanjan University of Medical Sciences.Materials and Methods: The present research is a descriptive-analytical study on 240 nurses working in the emergency and intensive care units of the medical education centers affiliated with Zanjan University of Medical Sciences in 2016; the nurses were selected based on census method.Data collection tools comprised demographic questionnaire and Corley's Moral Distress Scale.Data were analyzed in SPSS22.Results: The results if the present study indicated that the frequency and severity of moral distress of nurses working in the emergency departments and intensive care units was moderate.Conclusion: With respect to the moderate moral distress of nurses in the present study, it seems necessary to develop supportive strategies and moderate some of factors affecting moral distress of nurses in order to prevent such stresses.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.057

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0030.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.9600.943

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.403
Teacher spread0.354 · 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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTime to knit→Same topicEthics in medical practice→French-language works237,207→