MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1992278198 · doi:10.3928/01484834-20080801-02

Decision Making by Baccalaureate Nursing Students in the Clinical Setting

2008· article· en· W1992278198 on OpenAlex
Pamela Baxter, Sheryl Boblin

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 Nursing Education · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicNursing education and management
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInterdependenceClinical decision makingNurse educatorPsychologyBaccalaureate DegreeMedical educationNursingProcess (computing)Nurse educationQualitative researchMedicineHigher educationComputer scienceFamily medicineSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many researchers who have explored nurse decision making have concluded that decision making is a learned skill that must be taught by nurse educators. Yet little research has been conducted to explore nursing students' decision making. If nurse educators are to teach this skill, it is necessary to have a better understanding of the kinds of decisions students are making in the clinical setting and the factors that influence this process. Once we have a greater knowledge in this area, curricular materials can be developed to ensure this skill is taught throughout an undergraduate education, resulting in graduates who possess strong, independent, and interdependent decision making skills. This article will describe one component (the kinds of decisions) of a larger qualitative case study that explored the kinds of decisions and the factors that influenced nursing students' decision making throughout a baccalaureate degree program.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.903
Threshold uncertainty score0.561

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.475
Teacher spread0.415 · 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