Magnet Hospital Characteristics, and Patient Safety Culture Making the Link
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nurse managers are seeking ways to improve patient safety ' in their organizations. At the same time, tbey.struggle to address nurse recruitment and retention concerns by focusing on tbe quality of nurses " work environment. This exploratory study tested a theoretical model, linking the quality of the nursing practice environments to a culture of patient safety. Specific strategies to increase nnrses ' access to empowerment structures and thereby increase the culture of patient safety are suggested. Key words: cmpowenueut, Mti^-net. nursing prciclici'. pativnt safety, qucility • yATlENT SAFETY is a major concern in to-A ^ d a y s resource-constrained healthcare en-vironments. A recent report hy the Institute of Medicine (lOM) identified nursing as es-sential to patient safety and pointed to poor management practices and negative working cotiditions as major threats to patient safety,' The Canadian Adverse Events Study found that 36.9 % of the reported adverse events were highly preventable.- The IOM report noted that the quality of patient care is di-rectly affected by the degree to which hospital nurses are active and empowered participants in making decisions about their patient s plan
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 | 0.002 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.001 |
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".