MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1997333852 · doi:10.5539/gjhs.v6n6p11

The Role of Nursing Informatics on Promoting Quality of Health Care and the Need for Appropriate Education

2014· review· en· W1997333852 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Asieh Darvish, Fatemeh Bahramnezhad, Sara Keyhanian, Mojdeh Navidhamidi

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Journal of Health Science · 2014
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicElectronic Health Records Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersTehran University of Medical Sciences and Health ServicesUniversity of Tehran
KeywordsNursingQuality (philosophy)InformaticsMedicineHealth careHealth informaticsPolitical sciencePublic health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In today's dynamic health systems, technology plays an important role in education and nursing work. So it seems necessary to study the role of nurses and highlight the need for appropriate information technology educational programs to integrate with the ever-increasing pace of technology. A review accompanied by an extensive literature search in databases and a library search focused on the keywords were used. The criteria used for selecting studies primarily focused on nursing informatics and the importance of expertise in the effective use of information technology in all aspects of the nursing profession. In a critical assessment of emerging technologies, the key elements of nursing informatics implementation were considered as healthcare promotion, advanced systems, internet and network. In view of the nature and the development of the information age, it is required to receive necessary IT training for all categories of nurses. Due to the fast development of technology, in order to effectively take advantage of information technology in nursing outcome and quality of health care and to empower nurses; educational arrangement is recommended to set short-term and long-term specialized courses focusing on four target groups: studying, working, graduate, senior undergraduate, and graduate doctoral. The result of this study is expected to assist educational providers with program development.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.104
GPT teacher head0.554
Teacher spread0.451 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations93
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobal Journal of Health ScienceSame topicElectronic Health Records SystemsFrench-language works237,207