MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2019115799 · doi:10.12968/jowc.2005.14.9.26832

Assessing the primary nurse role in the wound healing process

2005· article· en· W2019115799 on OpenAlexaffabout
T. Huynh, C. Forget-Falcicchio

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Wound Care · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicNursing Roles and Practices
Canadian institutionsJewish Rehabilitation HospitalCentre de Santé et de Services Sociaux de la Montagne
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineWound healingNursingIntensive care medicineSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To delineate the role of the primary nurse in wound care. METHOD: Data were collected from patient charts within a free-standing rehabilitation hospital in a Canadian province. Within the context of a continuous quality improvement programme, a retrospective chart review was performed. An audit tool was constructed; its face validity was assessed by a panel of staff nurses. RESULTS: Primary nurses are involved in every step of wound care: assessment, treatment, evaluation of wound status and treatment. CONCLUSION: Within the cycle of continuous quality improvement (CQI), this project constitutes the first essential step of assessing the primary nurse's role in wound care. Further CQI studies such as in-service education in wound care and pre-post education evaluation projects are recommended.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.298
Threshold uncertainty score0.757

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.461
Teacher spread0.419 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations3
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Wound CareSame topicNursing Roles and PracticesFrench-language works237,207