MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Postcolonial Nursing Scholarship: From Epistemology to Method

2002· review· en· W1969428896 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in Nursing Science · 2002
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCultural Competency in Health Care
Canadian institutionsTrinity Western University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScholarshipRacializationSociologyPostcolonialism (international relations)Nursing researchTranscultural nursingNursing theoryEpistemologyCritical theoryFoundation (evidence)Set (abstract data type)NursingSocial scienceHealth careRace (biology)Gender studiesMEDLINEMedicinePolitical sciencePhilosophyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Postcolonial theory, with its interpretations of race, racialization, and culture, offers nursing scholarship a set of powerful analytic tools unlike those offered by other nursing and social theories. Building on the foundation established by those who first pointed to the importance of incorporating cultural aspects into nursing care, nursing scholarship is in a position to move forward. Critical perspectives such as postcolonialism equip us to meet the epistemological imperative of giving voice to subjugated knowledges and the social mandates of uncovering existing inequities and addressing the social aspects of health and illness. This article makes a case for the integration of postcolonial perspectives into theorizing and sketches out a research methodology based on the postcolonial tradition.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.978
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.005
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0030.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.075
GPT teacher head0.519
Teacher spread0.444 · 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