MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7067944956

Nurses' perceptions of leadership, teamwork, and safety climate in a community hospital in western Canada: A cross-sectional survey design

2014· dissertation· en· W7067944956 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueMspace (University of Manitoba) · 2014
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetics, Bioinformatics, and Biomedical Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPatient safetySafety climateCommunity hospitalPerceptionAcute careHealth careWork (physics)Community healthSocial exchange theory
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Patient safety and safety outcomes in hospitals are a major concern. A hospital’s safety climate indicates the degree to which the organization prioritizes patient safety and achieves intended care outcomes. Relationships between nurse managers and frontline nurses and relationships between health care team members are pivotal in promoting a positive safety climate which in turn reduces adverse patient outcomes. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to examine frontline nurses’ perceived relationships with nurse managers and health team members to identify factors associated with safety climate (SC) in a community hospital located in a western Canadian city. The study was guided by Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) theory. Leader-Member Exchange theory postulates that dyadic relationships and work roles develop over time through a series of exchanges between nurse managers and frontline nurses. The study further incorporated Team-member exchange (TMX), a theoretical extension of LMX. Team-Member Exchange was used to guide the study of reciprocal exchanges among nurses and other members of the health care team. A non-experimental, cross-sectional survey design was used to explore the relationship between acute care nurses’ perceived LMX, TMX, and SC. A convenience sampling technique was employed. Licensed practical nurses (LPNs) and registered nurses (RNs) were invited to complete a survey package comprised of four scales. A response rate of 31.1% was achieved with N=105. The majority of respondents were female (89.5%), over 45 years of age, and employed part-time. About half of the respondents were diploma-prepared nurses, whereas the other half had a baccalaureate degree in nursing. Based upon data’s non-normal distribution and various levels of variables, Kruskall Wallis H statistics were used to assess and compare groups in terms of the nurses’ education, gender, length of experience in their current position, specialty experience, organization experience, age, and LMX, TMX, and SC scores. Age was the sole demographic factor that had a statistically significant positive association with LMX and SC. This finding supported the notion that mature nurses enhance the SC. The relationship between TMX, LMX, and SC was explored through Spearman’s rho correlation statistics. LMX and TMX were found to have statistically significant relationships with SC. Multivariable regression analysis was used to identify factors with an association with SC. Nurses’ relationships with team members had a slightly stronger association with SC in comparison with LMX. Over 66% of SC variance was accountable by LMX, TMX, and nurses’ age. This study’s results support the nurse manager who partners with nurses to promote team work to deliver safe patient care and accomplish organizational goals. The presence of strong leadership that incorporates LMX and TMX theories into practice with the reliance upon mature nurses may facilitate the attainment of a positive SC and positive patient outcomes. Further longitudinal studies are recommended to add to the knowledge of the relationships between LMX, TMX, SC and patient outcomes.

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)0.003
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 score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.091

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.233 · 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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMspace (University of Manitoba)Same topicGenetics, Bioinformatics, and Biomedical ResearchFrench-language works237,207