MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2005620846 · doi:10.5737/1181912x223175181

Theory inspired practice for end-of-life cancer care: An exploration of the McGill Model of Nursing

2012· article· en· W2005620846 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
David Wright, C Gros

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Oncology Nursing Journal · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPalliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExtant taxonNursingNursing practicePalliative careValue (mathematics)Reflection (computer programming)MedicinePsychologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nursing theories provide inspiration for practice by describing how to meet needs, enhance wellness, and respond to clients as whole persons. This paper discusses the McGill Model of Nursing with reference to how its ideas can support nursing practice for patients with cancer during the end-of-life phase. We suggest this model provides for a relational approach that is congruent with the philosophy of palliative care. The goal of this paper is to stimulate reflection amongst oncology nurses and nursing leaders. By comparing the value base of our practice against extant nursing theory, we may discover new opportunities for teaching and learning about what it means to be an end-of-life care nurse.

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 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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.697
Threshold uncertainty score0.850

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.286
GPT teacher head0.485
Teacher spread0.199 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations13
Published2012
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Oncology Nursing JournalSame topicPalliative Care and End-of-Life IssuesFrench-language works237,207