The challenge of achieving interprofessional collaboration: Should we blame Nightingale?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The goal of implementing true interprofessional collaboration within the health care system seems to be elusive. The historical role of medicine as primary clinical leader and decision maker is particularly entrenched in the Western health care system. Florence Nightingale, the acknowledged founder of modern, Western nursing, is often blamed for the subservient role of nursing and other female-dominated health and social care professions. Is it fair to lay the blame on Nightingale? This paper seeks to place Nightingale in context and to revisit her own words to explore the Victorian world in which she worked as a social reformer. It argues that Nightingale made pragmatic compromises to gain acceptance for the new profession of nursing; that these compromises had unanticipated consequences that persist - but are not unchangeable.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.046 | 0.051 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.030 | 0.120 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.020 | 0.032 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.025 |
| Research integrity | 0.012 | 0.022 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".