Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 321

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Understanding the Complexity of Registered Nurse Work in Acute Care Settings

Ebright, Patricia R., Patterson, Emily S., Chalko, Barbara A., Render, Marta L.·2003·JONA: The Journal of Nursing Administration

Abstract

Nursing shortages and patient safety mandates require nursing managers and administrators to consider new ways of understanding the complexity of healthcare provider work in actual situations. The authors report findings from a study guided by an innovative research approach to explore factors affecting registered nurse performance during real work on acute care medical-surgical units. Our findings suggest beginning targets for interventions to improve patient safety, as well as recruitment and retention, through support for registered nurse work.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/00005110-200312000-00004

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Ebright, P. R., Patterson, E. S., Chalko, B. A., & Render, M. L.
Venue
JONA: The Journal of Nursing Administration
Published
2003-12
Volume
33
Issue
12
Pages
630-638
ISSN
0002-0443 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2036232752
Cited by
321
References
0
FWCI
23.53
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.