MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2000058260 · doi:10.1891/1078-4535.17.2.63

Social Justice Advocacy in Nursing: What is It? How do we Get There?

2011· article· en· W2000058260 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueCreative Nursing · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicNursing Education, Practice, and Leadership
Canadian institutionsHome and Community Care Support Services
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNursingSocial justicePatient advocacySocial workEquity (law)Policy advocacyNursing literatureEconomic JusticeSociologyPublic relationsPolitical scienceMedicineMEDLINELawCriminology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Social justice advocacy is an expectation of all nurses as expressed in the professional codes that guide nursing practice. Nursing literature reflects this shift in the focus of nursing advocacy, providing insight into the potentials and challenges associated with nursing's evolution toward a broader social justice advocacy model. This article describes the concept of social justice advocacy as currently reflected in professional codes and nursing literature and contrasts this with the individual patient–nurse advocacy model, which continues to dominate in nursing practice today. Challenges associated with movement toward a social justice advocacy model and options for addressing these hurdles are also discussed. Nurses work individually and with others for social justice and to advocate for laws, policies and procedures designed to bring about equity. (Canadian Nurses Association [CNA], 2008, p. 21)

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.819
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.089
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.294 · 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