Le leadership clinique des infirmières de la relève au Québec et l'influence du soutien organisationnel
Bibliographic record
Abstract
« Contexte et objectifs de recherche. Le leadership clinique (LC) réfère à l'aptitude à orienter, soutenir, coordonner pour accomplir les objectifs cliniques partagés par l'équipe de soins et le patient. Il est façonné par les ressources personnelles et varie en fonction de l'engagement des infirmières envers leur organisation. Ce type de leadership est associé à des éléments favorables autant chez les patients, qu'auprès des équipes de soins. Les études se contredisent toutefois quant à la capacité des infirmières de la relève d'exercer leur leadership clinique. Cette recherche s'est donc intéressée à 1) Mesurer le niveau de LC chez les infirmières de la relève; 2) Évaluer le soutien organisationnel offert aux infirmières de la relève dans l'exercice de leur rôle professionnel et 3) Vérifier l'existence d'un lien entre le LC des infirmières et le soutien organisationnel des infirmières de la relève. Méthode. Un devis quantitatif descriptif a permis de questionner 78 infirmières dans le cadre d'un questionnaire en ligne. Les 25 questions du Clinical Leadership Survey de Patrick et al. (2011) ont permis de documenter cinq dimensions liées au leadership clinique soit le fait de : 1) questionner le processus; 2) inspirer une vision à partager; 3) permettre aux autres d'agir; 4) donner l'exemple et 5) encourager le travail fait avec cœur. Pour mesurer le soutien organisationnel perçu (SOP), l'Organizational Environment Assessment comportant six questions a été utilisé (Tourangeau & McGilton, 2004). Résultats et discussion. Le score global du LC (M = 59,9/75, ÉT = 5,8) indique que les infirmières de la relève se perçoivent comme des leaders dans leur pratique clinique au quotidien. En général, les participant.es de l'étude percevaient leur LC plutôt élevé. La dimension 3 « Permettre aux autres d'agir » (M = 13,3/15, ÉT = 1,3) est la dimension la plus fréquemment réalisée comparativement à celle « Encourager le travail fait avec cœur » qui réfère à la reconnaissance de l'infirmière des valeurs liées à la profession infirmière chez ses collègues, la capacité à leur fournir des rétroactions positives et célébrer les réussites (M = 10,1/15, ÉT = 2,7) qui était plutôt faible. Pour ce qui est du SOP dans l'environnement de travail le résultat était plutôt moyen (M = 15,8/24, ÉT = 3,8). L'analyse entre les scores globaux de LC et ceux du SOP présente une corrélation modérée (r = 0,266, p = 0,019). Conclusion. Les résultats mettent de l'avant que les infirmières de la relève exercent leur leadership clinique dans un environnement considéré soutenant. -- Mot(s) clé(s) en français : Leadership clinique, infirmière de la relève, relève infirmière, leader clinique, soutien organisationnel perçu. »-- \n« Context and research objectives. Clinical leadership (CL) refers to the ability to guide, support, and coordinate with others to achieve the clinical goals shared by the healthcare team and the patient. It is shaped by personal resources and varies according to nurses' commitment to their organization. This type of leadership is associated with positive elements for both users and healthcare teams. However, studies contradict each other regarding the ability of new-generation nurses to exercise clinical leadership. Therefore, the present research was interested in: 1) Measuring the level of CL of new-generation nurses; 2) Assess the organizational support available to new nurses in their professional role and 3) Verifying the existence of a link between the CL of nurses and their perceived organizational support. Method. A descriptive quantitative design was used to survey 78 nurses through an online questionnaire. The 25 questions of the Clinical Leadership Survey of Patrick et al. (2011) were used to document five dimensions related to clinical leadership: 1) challenging the process; 2) inspiring a shared vision; 3) enabling others to act; 4) modeling the way and 5) encouraging the heart. To measure the perceived organizational support (POS), the Organizational Environment Assessment questionnaire, which includes six questions, was used (Tourangeau & McGilton, 2004). Results and discussion. The overall CL score (M = 59.9/75, SD = 5.8) indicates that the new-generation nurses perceive themselves as leaders in their daily clinical practice. Overall, the participants in the study perceived their CL as being relatively high. Dimension 3, "enable others to act" (M = 13.3/15, SD = 1.3), was the goal most commonly achieved, while "encourage the heart" (M = 10.1/15, SD = 2.7), the dimension referring to nurses' recognition of nursing values among their colleagues and their ability to provide them with positive feedback and celebrate successes, had a rather low score. As for the POS in the work environment, the result was relatively average (M = 15.8/24, SD = 3.8). The analysis between the overall CL scores and the POS scores showed moderate correlation (r = 0.266, p = .019). Conclusion. The results indicate that new-generation nurses are exercising clinical leadership in an environment that is considered supportive. -- Mot(s) clé(s) en anglais : Clinical leadership, nursing clinical leader, nursing clinical leadership, staff nurse clinical leadership, perceived organizational support, new nurses, new graduate 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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".