MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4387884041 · doi:10.21037/apm-23-514

For Annals of Palliative Medicine special series—Oncology Nursing

2023· editorial· en· W4387884041 sur OpenAlexaff
Margaret I. Fitch, Annie Young

Notice bibliographique

RevueAnnals of Palliative Medicine · 2023
Typeeditorial
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiquePalliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
Établissements canadiensUniversity of Toronto
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicineAnnalsPalliative careFamily medicineInternal medicineNursingClassics

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

When we were asked to serve as Guest Editors for a special series focused on Oncology Nursing, we eagerly accepted opportunity.Both of us had been involved in collaborations in many corners of the world with nurses who cared for cancer patients and we were in awe of the development in oncology nursing which had been unfolding, often despite real hardship and challenge.Nurses around the globe had been working diligently to ensure care for people at risk of cancer or with cancer and their caregivers was the best that it could be.The nurses often identified the need for improvement and with colleagues, were keen to action.Yet for many, barriers and seemingly insurmountable struggles were their daily reality.As Guest Editors, we felt a special series focused on oncology nursing around the world would provide a picture of the reality.This allowed us the opportunity to connect with colleagues, who may not yet have had an opportunity to share their stories.Nonetheless, we thought it prudent to review developments in education, research, leadership, and advocacy, given these have been the main routes to growing the specialty.These papers may pave the way for nurses in various settings, determining how they might progress the recognition and growth of oncology nursing as a specialty in their own countries.Thus, this special series gives insight into the perspectives of nurses who care for cancer patients in various regions of the world.Clearly, there are fundamental differences from setting to setting in economics, health beliefs, educational systems, and healthcare approaches.All of these factors influence how nurses are able to function and develop specialty practices in their ever-changing healthcare systems and circumstances.Undoubtedly, what strategies work in one setting may or may not be the ones to use in another setting.However, by sharing the approaches nurses around the globe have utilised, this special series offers a range of potential approaches.What is common among the narratives within the articles is the perseverance and determination of nurses, making concerted efforts through the years to highlight the concerns of cancer patients and their families.Their successes are closely tied to access to education, engagement in research and evidence-based practice, and their capacity to participate in policy development.The creation and establishment of a professional organization for cancer nurses, in-country, regional and global, has been key to drawing nurses together and fostering networking, professional development, and a shared sense of purpose.Colleagues who were invited to write for this special series expressed a desire to ensure the current status of oncology nursing was reflected.It has been several decades since the seeds of the speciality were planted and the growth has been remarkable.This is a testament to the vision and stamina of nurses working in adult and paediatric cancer care.Their efforts over the years have led to significant changes in care practices for patients and families as well as the evidence to support those practices.Symptom management, active listening, patient education, patient and caregiver support, patient empowerment, resilience, and leadership lie at the heart of compassionate nursing; all factors are evident throughout the special series.We hope the special series will serve to describe the state of the oncology nursing specialty in 2023 whilst providing the vision to grow together throughout the globe.

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 enseignants

Ni 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.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,002
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Éditorial · Signal consensuel: Éditorial
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,139
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,466

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0020,013
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0030,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0020,001
Bibliométrie0,0020,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0020,001
Communication savante0,0050,004
Science ouverte0,0020,003
Intégrité de la recherche0,0030,008
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,1390,061

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 Opus0,352
Tête enseignante GPT0,549
Écart entre enseignants0,196 · 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

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreÉditorial

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations1
Publié2023
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueAnnals of Palliative MedicineMême sujetPalliative Care and End-of-Life IssuesTravaux en français237 207