Influence of Education Portability and Geographical Mobility on Nursing Retention in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This review analysis evaluates the influence of agreement on internal trade (AIT) on retention of the registered nurses (RNs) in Canada. The 1994 AIT is an agreement between the federal, provincial, and Territories of Canadian governments to create an inclusive labor market for the employed, unemployed, under employed, through removal of barriers, and to enhance employment opportunities across Canada. This quantitative correlational review analysis is designed to evaluate the correlations between diploma RNs education portability, geographic mobility, the various levels of salary scales between the provinces, and its influence on RN retention after the AIT implementation in Canada. Data from the Canadian Institute for Health Information (CIHI) database is used for the review analysis. The review analysis provides the policy history, research question, and hypothesis. Furthermore, literature review and a review research design are presented consecutively. Finally, recommendations are given for AIT revision, and on strategies for increasing RN retention in Canada. Keywords: nursing retention, nursing shortage, nursing workforce, nursing mobility, agreement on internal trade, quantitative, RN education portability, geographical mobility
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.038 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.012 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".