MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Public Health Nursesʼ Perceptions of Mobile Computing in a School Program

2005· article· en· W1995064343 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

VenueCIN Computers Informatics Nursing · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMobile Health and mHealth Applications
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityHamilton Health Sciences
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPublic healthNursingPublic health nursingPerceptionExploratory researchFocus groupFlexibility (engineering)Health careQualitative researchSocial connectednessPsychologyMedicineMedical educationSociologyPolitical scienceManagement

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The use of mobile computing (MC) in healthcare practice has grown substantially in recent years, yet little is known about its impact. This descriptive, exploratory, qualitative study explored the perceptions of public health nurses (PHNs) in a school health program about their use of MC. Public health nurses participated in focus group interviews and completed weekly reflections. They perceived that MC (a) increased PHNs' flexibility although they were constrained by work rules, (b) increased peer and employer connectedness yet increased isolation, (c) and increased PHNs' status while creating a wider gap between PHNs and their clients. Public health nurses described their practice as being more efficient and client-focused with MC. Over time, PHNs grew more comfortable with the tool, developed a dependence on it, and learned to deal with technological problems. Although this new technology shows promise, there is a need for further research to examine its impact as a tool to promote public health nursing practice.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.936
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.449
Teacher spread0.382 · 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