Investigating the Relationship Between Self-Efficacy and Caring Behaviors in Critical Care Nurses: A Cross-Sectional Study
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This descriptive-analytical cross-sectional study investigated the relationship between self-efficacy and self-reported caring behaviors of 198 nurses working in intensive care units of hospitals affiliated with Tehran University of Medical Sciences in Tehran, Iran in 2023. The tools used were a Sociodemographic Information Form, the Nursing Profession Self-Efficacy Scale, and the Caring Behaviors Inventory. In the multiple linear regression model, the support situation subscale of self-efficacy was significantly associated with the total caring behavior scores of nurses ( β = 1.9, 95% CI = 1.74–2.07, p = 0.001). In the multiple linear regression model, 70% of the variance in caring behaviors among nurses was explained ( R 2 = 0.73). By recognizing the role of social support in fostering nurses’ confidence and competence, healthcare organizations can implement targeted interventions to promote a supportive work environment and enhance patient care outcomes.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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 it