Servius, Commentaire au Livre VI de l'Enéide : introduction, texte, traduction et commentaire
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Province-Wide Nursing Project (PWNP) was designed to remove some of the structural barriers that can impede the ability of nurses in selected health care settings to assess, implement and evaluate best nursing practice. Literature on capacity building and research utilization suggests that the organization is the most important factor in promoting best nursing practice. Therefore, managers and nursing leaders need to encourage the creation of optimum work environments. A survey undertaken by the PWNP Research Centre team assessed the extent to which the 23 agencies in the 4 Participating Complexes provided supportive environments for evidence-based practice. The Characteristics of Agencies in Participating Complexes: Demographics and Resources questionnaire investigated the resources available to help nurses improve their standards of practice in agencies participating in the project. Larger agencies, especially those associated with academic centres, had considerably more resources than agencies in smaller towns. Participation in the Province-Wide Nursing Project enabled agencies to develop strategies to improve the use of evidence in nursing practice.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".