Editor's introduction to the special issue on the 25th international nursing philosophy conference associated with the International Philosophy of Nursing Society
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
We wish to share some new developments concerning the introduction of this annual special issue of the journal, stemming from the international nursing philosophy conference associated with the International Philosophy of Nursing Society (IPONS). This year's special issue is guest edited by Dr. Jess Dillard-Wright and Dr. Agness Tembo, who served on the 2022 conference planning committee and are elected members of the IPONS executive board. Their invited editorial does important work describing the conference discussions and the papers published here. To provide some context, 2022 marked the 25th event of the conference, which was hosted by the Sue & Bill Gross School of Nursing's Center for Nursing Philosophy at the University of California Irvine, USA in August 2022. The history of the conference began with a committed group of philosophers of nursing at Swansea UK in 1997 and has grown to encompass inquiry across the nursing-philosophy terrain. The 2022 conference theme, “What has philosophy ever done for nursing anyway?” was developed back in 2019 by Derek Sellman, then editor-in-chief of Nursing Philosophy and director of the Unit for Philosophical Nursing Research at the University of Alberta, Canada. It was a humorous take on a Monty Python quote (What have the Romans ever done for us?). Yet it was a call for serious discussion as well. Derek Sellman is now retired and while the conference sadly happened without his presence, his spirit happily remains ever-present in the conference theme. The International Philosophy of Nursing Society also owes much of its conception, establishment and overarching goals to Professor Steve Edwards, who sadly passed in 2020. The Steve Edwards Memorial Lecture was established by the IPONS executive board in April 2021, and the 2022 conference marked the inaugural lecture, given by Dr. Janet Holt and published in this issue. A further addition to the annual conference issue is that accepted conference abstracts are being published for the first time. We welcome this expansion of conference content, as it allows those who were unable to attend the conference to learn about all the topics that were discussed. Also, all conference panels, keynotes, and virtual conversations, were recorded and can be accessed here (the link is: https://padlet.com/jdillardwright/international-philosophy-of-nursing-conference-vsxlg35a28hqkq6e). We hope you enjoy reading this special issue and look forward to submitting the call for manuscripts stemming from the September 2023 conference, which is being hosted by the University of Sydney, Australia, in association with IPONS. We hope to see you there!
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.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,005 | 0,019 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,003 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,010 | 0,005 |
| Science ouverte | 0,003 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,006 | 0,010 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,075 | 0,037 |
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.
score_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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».