AN EXPLORATION OF CRITICAL CARE NURSESâ EXPERIENCE OF NIGHT SHIFT FATIGUE AND WORKPLACE NAPPING: BRINGING IT OUT FROM UNDER THE COVERS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recently, there has been increasing recognition of the threat of fatigue on safety. Nursing has been slow to recognize this threat. Workplace napping is a fatigue management strategy that is used in some nursing workplaces, although often hidden. \n\nThis feminist interpretive phenomenological study explored the lived experience of night shift fatigue and the use of workplace napping among critical care nurses. An understanding of the meaning of night shift fatigue, the concern for safety as embodied by fear, was illuminated by exploring the phenomenological commonalities within the nursesâ historical, social and cultural world. Five main themes were identified within this overarching understanding. \n\nThere is a need to recognize oppressive constraints, and share the responsibility for managing fatigue among individuals, professions and organizations. In education, practice and research, nurses must be supported through validated evidence-informed strategies to manage what is a normal consequence of shift work, thus leading to enhanced safety for both the patient and nurse.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".