Nurse Manager Perspectives about Internationally Educated Nurses (IENs) and Hiring Practices in Long-Term Care
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Internationally Educated Nurses (IENs) are an integral part of Canada’s workforce. In a qualitative study, seven Nurse Managers from long-term care facilities in British Columbia were interviewed about their perceptions and experiences with IENs, and how these influenced their hiring practices. Three themes emerged: Acknowledging the Complexities, Finding the “Right Fit”, and Navigating Differences. Conclusions were that Nurse Managers: 1) Compared IENs to newly graduated nurses, 2) Generally preferred hiring Canadian educated nurses over IENs, 3) Perceived IENs as being ready to practice, but failed to acknowledge their nursing education and experience, 4) Perceived IENs as a homogenous group, 5) Preferred hiring IENs with positive attitudes, clear communication skills, and Canadian nursing experience, 6) Were unware of current licensing guidelines, 7) Used no established hiring guidelines, and 8) Possessed a positive ‘gut feeling” about new hires. Recommendations for nursing education, management, and research are made based on these conclusions.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".