MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Beyond Dualism: Leading Out of Oppression

2006· review· en· W2019386576 on OpenAlexaff
Karen Fletcher

Bibliographic record

VenueNursing Forum · 2006
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender Diversity and Inequality
Canadian institutionsWinnipeg Regional Health Authority
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOppressionDualismEmpowermentContext (archaeology)Identity (music)SociologyGender studiesEpistemologyPsychologyPolitical scienceAestheticsPhilosophyLawHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: To reexamine our beliefs about our gender identity in order to identify new possibilities for leading in nursing. SOURCES OF INFORMATION: Leadership is complex. This article is the result of a lengthy iterative process of exploring the empowerment, image, leadership, feminist, and oppression literature. All of this was distilled in the context of the author's experience as a nurse and nurse leader. CONCLUSIONS: Moving beyond dualism creates new possibilities for leading nurses out of oppression.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.223
GPT teacher head0.423
Teacher spread0.200 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations71
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNursing ForumSame topicGender Diversity and InequalityFrench-language works237,207