MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Nursing Care and Patient Safety: Visualizing Medication Organization, Storage and Distribution with Photographic Research Methods

2010· article· en· W1998743729 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista Latino-Americana de Enfermagem · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDigital Imaging in Medicine
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersUniversity of Alberta
KeywordsUnit (ring theory)NursingQualitative researchPatient safetyMedicineHealth carePsychologySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this qualitative study, we adapted photographic research methods from earlier nursing research to identify factors related to organization, storage and distribution that could lead to errors in the selection, preparation and administration of medications. The research excerpt presented here was developed in a clinical unit of an urban Brazilian public hospital. The research participants were nurses working at that unit and students from the two final semesters of the Undergraduate Nursing Course. We collected digital photographs of the medication system and subsequently used photo elicitation to review the images with research participants, so as to obtain their perceptions and narratives of working with medications in the unit. We report selected findings here on the organization, storage and distribution of medications, which indicate there is room to improve the safety of the medication system.

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)0.002
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 score0.768
Threshold uncertainty score0.680

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.413
Teacher spread0.387 · 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