MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1986415782 · doi:10.1097/jfn.0000000000000026

The Role of the Sexual Assault Nurse Examiner in England

2014· article· en· W1986415782 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 Forensic Nursing · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSexual Assault and Victimization Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNursingMedicineSexual assaultForensic nursingVariety (cybernetics)Suicide preventionPoison controlMedical emergency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sexual Assault Nurse Examiners (SANEs) were introduced in the United Kingdom in 2001, but there is a lack of knowledge about their role and the services they provide. The aim of this study was to explore the role of SANEs currently working in England. Qualitative semistructured interviews explored the training experiences, roles, and working practices of five SANEs in a variety of settings. The findings identified three categories: training and qualifications, SANE care, and working within multidisciplinary teams (MDT). SANEs have complex roles that involve patient care as well as collection of forensic evidence. There was variation in service provision and training of SANEs interviewed and differences in how they felt their role was regarded by members of the MDT. The findings suggest that SANE services need further evaluation to determine a model of practice that can be consistently implemented to provide both optimal patient care and reliable forensic evidence.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.764
Threshold uncertainty score0.278

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.289 · 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