Nursing students’ beliefs about poverty and health
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: This paper examines baccalaureate nursing students' beliefs about the relationship between poverty and health, and the factors that influence these beliefs. BACKGROUND: The relationship between poverty and health is well established, and poverty remains a persistent problem in many industrialized nations. Nurses' understanding of how poverty influences health will affect how they interact with individual clients as well as the strategies they employ to address poverty-related issues. No studies have examined nursing students' understandings of how poverty influences health and the factors that influence that understanding. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey of a random sample (n = 740) of basic baccalaureate nursing students was conducted in three Canadian universities in 2000. Students completed a 59-item questionnaire eliciting data on demographic variables, personal and educational exposure to poverty, beliefs about the relationship between poverty and health (myth, drift, behavioural, structural), and attitudes to poverty. RESULTS: Students were most likely to adhere to a structural explanation of the relationship between poverty and health. Very little of the variance in myth and drift explanations was accounted for by course or personal exposure, programme level, age, and attitudes toward poverty. Greater course exposure and more positive attitudes toward the poor predicted support for the structural explanation. Support for the behavioural explanation was influenced by attitudes toward the poor and, to a lesser extent, by course exposure, age, and programme level. CONCLUSION: Students would benefit from greater exposure to poverty through coursework that emphasizes the structural factors contributing to poverty and its negative health consequences. Classroom experience should be complemented with clinical placements that provide students with opportunities to interact with families living in poverty and to work collaboratively with others to address the causes and consequences of poverty at community and policy levels.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
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".