MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4248746249 · doi:10.30770/2572-1852-96.1.31

State Member Board Briefs

2010· article· en· W4248746249 sur OpenAlex

Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base

Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.

aboutLe titre ou le résumé porte un signal canadien du lexique géographique.
no affAucune affiliation canadienne : ce travail est invisible pour une base fondée sur la seule affiliation.
Aucune affiliation canadienne. Une base fondée sur la seule affiliation (le devis habituel) n'aurait jamais vu ce travail. C'est l'un des travaux qui justifient l'inversion de la base.

Notice bibliographique

RevueJournal of Medical Regulation · 2010
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineHealth Professions
ThématiqueNursing Roles and Practices
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMember stateState (computer science)Member statesComputer scienceBusinessEuropean unionAlgorithmInternational trade

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

The Colorado State Board of Nursing and the Colorado Medical Board recently began implementing new complementary rules for advanced practice nurses (APNs) with prescriptive authority. These new rules were enacted as part of Senate Bill 09-239 and became effective July 1, 2010.The new requirements, which are intended to clarify prescribing responsibilities, will affect currently licensed advanced practice nurses with prescriptive authority as well as new applicants for prescriptive authority.Under the new requirements, a collaborative agreement between an advanced practice nurse with prescriptive authority and a physician is no longer required. An “Articulated Plan for Safe Prescribing” is required instead.An articulated plan does not require an ongoing involvement of a physician, as the former collaborative agreement did.Under the new requirements, APNs who wish to obtain prescriptive authority are required to:For specific information regarding the role of the physician in the precepting, mentoring and development of the APN's Articulated Plan to obtain prescriptive authority, visit http://www.dora.state.co.us/medical/advancedpractice.htmSource: Colorado State Medical Board website, June 2010The Georgia Composite Medical Board voted earlier this year to use the list titled “Medical Schools Recognized by the Medical Board of California” as its official reference for approval of medical schools located outside the United States and Canada.Graduates of the schools contained in this list are required to complete one year of postgraduate training in a program accredited by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME).Graduates attending schools not listed in the Medical Schools Recognized by the Medical Board of California must complete three years of postgraduate training in a program accredited by the ACGME. The list Georgia is now using can be viewed online at: http://www.mbc.ca.gov/applicant/schools.htmlSource: “New IMG Policy,” Georgia Composite Medical Board website, June 2010The North Carolina Medical Board has established new standards for physicians supervising registered polysomnographic technologists (RPSGTs), also known as “sleep techs.”In 2009 the North Carolina General Assembly passed into law “The Polysomnography Practice Act,” (S.L. 2009-434), which regulates the practice of RPSGTs, who perform and assist in interpreting sleep studies to aid physicians in the diagnosis of sleep disorders.The Assembly then tasked the North Carolina Medical Board with identifying standards for physicians supervising RPSGTs with the goal of improving the quality and safety of sleep studies. The Medical Board convened a work group to establish those standards, which were adopted earlier this year.The new law mandates that the North Carolina Medical Board maintain a registry of RPSGTs that are registered by the Board of Registered Polysomnographic Technologists (BRPT). The Medical Board will now collect the name, full address, date of registration with the BRPT, and proof of registration for RPSGTs in the state. The Medical Board will not be responsible for determining whether registration of a practitioner is appropriate, and it will not discipline RPSGTs for substandard practice. Instead the Board merely acts as the repository for the registry information.Starting in 2012, RPSGTs cannot practice in North Carolina unless they are a part of the registry and meet a variety of other requirements.North Carolina's new law requires that RPSGTs work under the indirect supervision of a physician. The supervising physician is required to have policies and procedures in place for the safe and appropriate completion of RPSGT services and must be readily available to render assistance if needed, but on-site supervision is not required.The law also mandates that sleep studies may only be performed in a hospital, standalone sleep laboratory or sleep center, or in a patient's home. The law permits other licensed or registered health care professionals or those working under the supervision of another health care professional to perform sleep studies; however, only those individuals registered with the Medical Board may use the designation “RPSGT.” Violation of the new law is a Class I misdemeanor.The Medical Board will develop more detailed procedures for RPSGTs who must register under the Act closer to the January 2012 implementation deadline. For more information, visit the Board's website at www.ncmedboard.org.Source: North Carolina State Medical Board website, June 2010The West Virginia Board of Medicine has adopted a new position statement: Guidelines for Physicians in Collaborative Relationships with Advanced Nurse Practitioners or Certified Nurse Midwives. The statement provides guidance to physicians clarifying their responsibilities when entering into collaborative work relationships with advanced nurse practitioners and certified nurse midwives.The West Virginia position statement stipulates that physicians entering into such relationships must be fully licensed in West Virginia without practice restrictions or limitations, and that they must create written collaborative agreements with nurses and midwives they work with.Written collaborative agreements must include a variety of specific provisions outlined in the position statement.Physicians who fail to adhere to the new guidelines established in the position statement may be subject to discipline by the Board. To learn more, visit the West Virginia Board of Medicine website at http://www.wvbom.wv.gov/Source: West Virginia Board of Medicine Policy Statement: “Guidelines for Physicians in Collaborative Relationships with Advanced Nurse Practitioners or Certified Nurse Midwives,” May 2010

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,003
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesCharge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,383
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,993

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0030,002
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0080,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,045
Tête enseignante GPT0,463
Écart entre enseignants0,418 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle