MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4389309442 · doi:10.1097/cnj.0000000000001126

Mary Thompson

2023· article· en· W4389309442 sur OpenAlexaff
Christy Secor

Notice bibliographique

RevueJournal of Christian Nursing · 2023
Typearticle
Langueen
DomainePsychology
ThématiqueResilience and Mental Health
Établissements canadiensFuture Earth
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésFacilitatorCourageShameVulnerability (computing)Power (physics)PsychoanalysisSociologyPsychologyCertificationSocial psychologyPolitical scienceLawComputer securityComputer science

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Figure: Mary ThompsonFigureMary Thompson (1939-2023) was national director of Nurses Christian Fellowship USA (NCF) from 1984 to 2007. Mary demonstrated a lifetime of faithful service and hope in Jesus Christ through her work with NCF. She graduated with her Bachelor of Science degree in Nursing from the University of Minnesota in 1962, receiving the honor of Highest Distinction. Mary also completed her Master of Science degree in Nursing at California State University, Los Angeles, in 1979. Mary first worked at the University of Minnesota Hospital and as a school nurse at Roseville High School in Roseville, Minnesota. She served as the West Coast Area Director for NCF. From 1996 until 2004, Mary also served as president for Nurses Christian Fellowship International. After retirement, Mary became a faith community nurse and was active in the lay care ministry of her church. She mentored students, new graduates, and nurses alike. As a leader of the Twin Cities NCF professional nurse group, Mary was instrumental in the group's success in reaching a broader audience during the COVID-19 pandemic. If one word could be used to describe Mary, it would be hope. Hope was the subject of her master's degree thesis in which she conducted interviews over time with individuals with a cancer diagnosis. Within her interviews, she identified hope as a vital component of life (Thompson, 1994). Mary identified two aspects of the phenomenon of hope: facilitators of hope and expressions of hope (Thompson, 1994). Facilitators of hope begin with love from others and/or God leading to a sense of being cared for and respected. Mutuality, the reciprocal relationship existing with others and/or God through shared experiences and resources, contributes to the sharing of ourselves with others; healthy dependence on others dispels fear and fosters freedom to make choices, explore alternatives, and develop creativity as well as the discovery of new insights (Thompson, 1994). Mary noted how expressions of hope grew from these insights, fostering growth or change and feelings of control in one's destiny. Positive expectations for the future lead to the perception and belief of goals being attained which also increases meaning and purpose in life (Thompson, 1994). As goals are set, even times of waiting are seen as active processes leading toward action. The cycle then continues to repeat and build. Relationally, Mary fostered hope in others. She understood the power of presence and the value of doing life together, whether eating a meal around her table or talking with a new grad about the first loss of a patient. She enjoyed new opportunities, and her sense of courage and humor supported her as she traveled through the United States or caught a bus loaded with people and chickens in Fiji for an international conference. Mary spent much time in prayer. Her connection with the God of hope fostered hope in others. You could see and experience hope as Mary openly lived out her joys and challenges. She sometimes struggled to find the words she wanted to speak. But one word remained a consistent part of her vocabulary, “Wonderful...wonderful!” In her later days, she expressed this word any time someone entered her room, offered her a drink, or prayed with her. Approaching end of life did not decrease Mary's hope. It simply provided a doorway for her to experience hope in its fullness. Let us continue to encourage each other to walk and live in this legacy of hope. Find relationship with other nurses in NCF through membership, student and nurse groups, and national events. Visit ncf-jcn.org and learn more!

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 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)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,814
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,434

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
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 recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

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 Opus0,036
Tête enseignante GPT0,436
Écart entre enseignants0,400 · 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 tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

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

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

En bref

Citations2
Publié2023
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueJournal of Christian NursingMême sujetResilience and Mental HealthTravaux en français237 207