MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412756623 · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2025-099358

Are minimum nurse-to-patient staffing ratios needed in hospitals? An observational study in British Columbia, Canada

2025· article· en· W4412756623 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Karen B. Lasater, Heather Brom, Linda H. Aiken, Matthew D. McHugh

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicNursing education and management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute of Nursing Research
KeywordsMedicineStaffingPatient safetyObservational studyBurnoutNursingHealth careFamily medicineAcute careHealth services researchEmergency medicinePublic health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate staffing conditions, patient outcomes, quality of care, patient safety and nurse job outcomes in British Columbia (BC), Canada hospitals. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study of 58 hospitals in BC with surveys of nurses and independent measures of patient outcomes. SETTING: 58 hospitals in BC. PARTICIPANTS: 6685 hospital-based nurses working in a direct patient care role. EXPOSURES: Hospital-wide and unit-specific patient-to-nurse staffing ratios derived from registered nurse reports of how many patients and how many nurses were on their unit during their last shift worked. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Objective patient outcome measures included the Hospital Standardized Mortality Ratio (HSMR) and 30-day Readmission Rate, from 2022 to 2023 Canadian Institute for Health Information data. Nurses4All@BC provided data from 2024 using validated items on multiple measures (eg, nurse burnout, missed health breaks, intentions to leave, quality and safety measures such as culture of patient safety, quality of nursing care, missed nursing care). RESULTS: Burnout (59.4%), missed health breaks (41.7%), job dissatisfaction (36.0%), intentions to leave (19.3%) and patient outcomes (HSMR mean 95.4, median 96.0, range 26-180; readmission rate mean 10.0%, median 9.5%, range 7.9%-13.8%) were high and varied across hospitals. 68.3% of nurses reported there were not enough staff, and 77.3% reported their workloads were unsafe for patients. 60.6% of nurses gave their hospital an unfavourable patient safety rating. More patients per nurse were associated with poorer hospital mortality and readmission rates, poorer job outcomes for nurses, more adverse events for patients, less favourable ratings of quality of care and patient safety, more missed nursing care and poorer ratings of staffing adequacy and management. CONCLUSIONS: Given the variability in staffing, quality and patient outcomes across BC hospitals, the implementation of a minimum nurse-to-patient ratio policy has the potential to improve patient care safety and retention of nurses.

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)0.005
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.277

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.314 · 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

Citations4
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ OpenSame topicNursing education and managementFrench-language works237,207