MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6963872076 · doi:10.20381/ruor-28257

Untold Stories of the ER : Providing Care During the COVID-19 Pandemic as Narrated by Emergency Room Nurses in Toronto, Ontario, Canada

2022· other· en· W6963872076 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueuO Research (University of Ottawa) · 2022
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNarrativeNarrative inquiryDutyPandemicContext (archaeology)WorkloadHealth careEmergency nursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As the COVID-19 pandemic has taken hold of Toronto, Ontario, Canada, and the world, it has highlighted many challenges healthcare workers face. Those nurses working in the emergency room (ER), settings that are under normal circumstances unpredictable and acute, have been particularly affected. This research aimed to explore the stories ER nurses tell to describe their experiences of working during the COVID-19 pandemic in Toronto, Canada. Narrative methodology was used to understand the thoughts, feelings, and problems facing ER nurses. The research study includes the stories of three Toronto-based ER nurses who share their experiences of working during the COVID-19 pandemic. Participants were interviewed twice, and data was analysed using the three-dimensional narrative inquiry space of time, sociality, and place. Plotlines of 'before they were heroes', 'hero', 'fall from grace', 'villain' and 'to be continued', organized each story. Resounding narrative threads emerged across the three narrative accounts and are presented as understandings. Threads that resonated across the stories include mistrust in leadership, fear and isolation, expectations and duty to care, nursing shortages, personal safety and PPE, workload and stress, moral and psychological distress, and lost voice. The findings of this inquiry offer a new context for understanding the thoughts, feelings, and problems facing ER nurses working in Toronto during the COVID-19 pandemic in a way that preserves, values, and respects the voices and stories of the nurses themselves, thus allowing for emotional healing while offering insight for nursing education, practice, and research.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.068
Threshold uncertainty score0.478

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0270.013
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0030.006
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.273 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueuO Research (University of Ottawa)French-language works237,207