MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Nursing ethics and conceptualizations of nursing: profession, practice and work

2004· article· en· W1976276473 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

VenueJournal of Advanced Nursing · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicEthics in medical practice
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNursing ethicsAutonomyNursingMoralityHealth carePossession (linguistics)Social workApplied ethicsProfessional ethicsSociologyEngineering ethicsMedicinePolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Nursing has been understood as a calling, vocation, profession, and most recently, a practice. Each of these conceptualizations has associated with it an ethics that has emphasized particular aspects of nursing reflecting the social position of nursing in a given historical period. The ethics associated with current understandings of nursing as a profession and a practice are, we believe, no longer adequate to address the social realities and moral challenges of health care work. AIM: The aim of this paper is to discuss the limitations of the ethics associated with profession and practice and to show why the concept of work can contribute to a nursing ethics. DISCUSSION: The characteristics that have socially defined professionals, among them the possession of a unique body of knowledge, provision of an altruistic service to society, and autonomy in the sense of control over their work and work conditions, only partially reflect the realities of contemporary health care work. This is true even for physicians, an exemplar of a professional group. The ethics associated with the professions has tended to limit what counts as a moral concern and who is authorized to label them as such. More recently, the idea of a practice has been used to argue for an ethics in which professional activities of a certain kind and understood in a specific way are inherently moral. However, this approach is limited for similar reasons. Because morality cannot be separated from the social organization of health care, we argue that considering nursing primarily as work, in contrast to a profession or a practice, offers the possibility of an ethics that more completely reflects the complexity of contemporary health care. CONCLUSION: Beyond the obvious conclusion that nursing is work, conceptualizing nursing as work points to changing social realities that are raising significant ethical issues. As a concept, work inherently conveys value, connects intellectual and manual labour, and recognizes social divisions of labour. At the moment an ethics of work is merely an idea, but we believe that such an ethics would lead nurses to ask different questions and propose different answers to the moral challenges of the present and near future.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.049
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.590
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.049
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.009
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 head0.151
GPT teacher head0.576
Teacher spread0.425 · 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