MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1967352344 · doi:10.5737/1181912x2213135

Mentoring advanced practice nurses in research: Recommendations from a pilot program

2011· article· en· W1967352344 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Doris Y. P. Leung, Kimberley Widger, Doris Howell, Sioban Nelson, Alex Molassiotis

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Oncology Nursing Journal · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth Sciences Research and Education
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
FundersHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsMentorshipAdvanced Practice NursesMedical educationDoctor of Nursing PracticeAcademic institutionPlan (archaeology)MedicineTranslational researchNursing practiceNursingNurse educationManagementPolitical scienceHealth care

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Advanced Practice Nurses (APNs) need research skills to develop and advance their practice and, yet, many have limited access to research training and support following completion of their advanced degree. In this paper we report on the development, delivery, and evaluation of an innovative pilot program that combined research training and one-to-one mentorship for nine APNs in conducting research relevant to their practice. The program was organized within an academic institution and its affiliated hospitals in Toronto, Canada. Our experience with this program may assist those in other organizations to plan and deliver a similar program for APN research mentorship.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.085
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.107
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.085
Threshold uncertainty score0.450

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0850.107
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0060.002
Scholarly communication0.0060.005
Open science0.0070.007
Research integrity0.0060.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.619
GPT teacher head0.651
Teacher spread0.032 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations8
Published2011
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Oncology Nursing JournalSame topicHealth Sciences Research and EducationFrench-language works237,207