1,720,958 research outputs found

    Nurse-to-Nurse Collaboration

    No full text
    OBJECTIVETo map predictors and outcome of collaboration between nurses, outcomes of a good collaboration, and the tools developed to evaluate nurse-nurse collaboration.BACKGROUNDCollaboration between nurses is an intraprofessional relationship between coworkers that is expressed through shared objectives, authority, and a decisional process. Studies on collaboration between nurses are very limited.METHODSA scoping review was conducted through 4 databases.RESULTSEighteen studies were included. Nurses with higher levels of collaboration are more satisfied with their work and report less of an intention to leave their job. Greater collaboration among nurses resulted in a decrease of patient falling, hospital-acquired pressure ulcers, and a better care. Three tools have been developed to evaluate nurse-nurse collaboration: the Nurse-Nurse Collaboration Scale, the Nurse-Nurse Collaboration Behavior Scale, and the Nurse-Nurse Collaboration Between Sector.CONCLUSIONSFurther studies should be conducted to fully understand the issue of collaboration between nurses and the factors connected to it

    Semantic Evaluation of Nursing Assessment Scales Translations by ChatGPT 4.0: A Lexicometric Analysis

    No full text
    Background/Objectives: The use of standardized assessment tools within the nursing care process is a globally established practice, widely recognized as a foundation for evidence-based evaluation. Accurate translation is essential to ensure their correct and consistent clinical use. While effective, traditional procedures are time-consuming and resource-intensive, leading to increasing interest in whether artificial intelligence can assist or streamline this process for nursing researchers. Therefore, this study aimed to assess the translation’s quality of nursing assessment scales performed by ChatGPT 4.0. Methods: A total of 31 nursing rating scales with 772 items were translated from English to Italian using two different prompts, and then underwent a deep lexicometric analysis. To assess the semantic accuracy of the translations the Sentence-BERT, Jaccard similarity, TF-IDF cosine similarity, and Overlap ratio were used. Sensitivity, specificity, AUC, and AUROC were calculated to assess the quality of the translation classification. Paired-sample t-tests were conducted to compare the similarity scores. Results: The Maastricht prompt produced translations that are marginally but consistently more semantically and lexically faithful to the original. While all differences were found to be statistically significant, the corresponding effect sizes indicate that the advantage of the Maastricht prompt is slight but consistent across all measures. The sensitivity of the prompts was 0.929 (92.9%) for York and 0.932 (93.2%) for Maastricht. Specificity and precision remained for both at 1.000. Conclusions: Findings highlight the potential of prompt engineering as a low-cost, effective method to enhance translation outcomes. Nonetheless, as translation represents only a preliminary step in the full validation process, further studies should investigate the integration of AI-assisted translation within the broader framework of instrument adaptation and validation

    Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis

    Full text link
    The present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed

    Variations on the Author

    Full text link
    “Variations on the Author” discusses two of Eduardo Coutinho’s recent films (Um Dia na Vida, from 2010, and Últimas Conversas, posthumously released in 2015) and their contribution to the general question of documentary authorship. The director’s filmography is characterized by a consistent yet self-effacing form of authorial self-inscription: Coutinho often features as an interviewer that rather than express opinions propels discourses; an interviewer that is good at listening. This mode of self-inscription characterizes him as an author who is not expressive but who is nonetheless markedly present on the screen. In Um Dia na Vida, however, Coutinho is completely absent form the image, while Últimas Conversas, on the contrary, includes a confessional prologue that moves the director from the margins to the center of his films. This article examines the ways in which these works stand out in the filmography of a director who offers new insights into the notion of cinematic authorship

    Appropriate Similarity Measures for Author Cocitation Analysis

    Full text link
    We provide a number of new insights into the methodological discussion about author cocitation analysis. We first argue that the use of the Pearson correlation for measuring the similarity between authors’ cocitation profiles is not very satisfactory. We then discuss what kind of similarity measures may be used as an alternative to the Pearson correlation. We consider three similarity measures in particular. One is the well-known cosine. The other two similarity measures have not been used before in the bibliometric literature. Finally, we show by means of an example that our findings have a high practical relevance.information science;Pearson correlation;cosine;similarity measure;author cocitation analysis

    Dispelling the Myths Behind First-author Citation Counts

    Full text link
    We conducted a full-scale evaluative citation analysis study of scholars in the XML research field to explore just how different from each other author rankings resulting from different citation counting methods actually are, and to demonstrate the capability of emerging data and tools on the Web in supporting more realistic citation counting methods. Our results contest some common arguments for the continued use of first-author citation counts in the evaluation of scholars, such as high correlations between author rankings by first-author citation counts and other citation counting methods, and high costs of using more realistic citation counting methods that are not well-supported by the ISI databases. It is argued that increasingly available digital full text research papers make it possible for citation analysis studies to go beyond what the ISI databases have directly supported and to employ more sophisticated methods

    Author Index

    No full text
    Nao informado

    koamabayili/VECTRON-author-checklist: VECTRON author checklist

    No full text
    We have done our best to complete the author checklist relating to the use of animals in the hut study. Note that the objective for the hut study was to evaluate the IRS treatment applications for residual efficacy against Anopheles mosquitoes, including the local An. coluzzii mosquito population. Cows were only used to attract mosquitoes into the huts and no tests were carried out directly on the cows. The author checklist is intended for use with studies where experiments are carried out on animals, which is why we have had such difficulty in completing this for the hut study, as many of the questions do not relate to how the cows were used
    corecore