MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W202642066

Dementia awareness in northern nursing practice.

2010· article· en· W202642066 on OpenAlexaffabout
Mary E. Andrews, Debra Morgan, Norma J. Stewart

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicIndigenous Studies and Ecology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDementiaNursingNorthern irelandPerceptionNorthern italyPerspective (graphical)PsychologyAged careNursing practiceGrounded theoryMedicineQualitative researchSociology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this study was to identify key concepts in dementia care from the perspective of registered nurses working in the Canadian north. Interviews were conducted with RNs employed in small, remote northern communities about their experiences with dementia assessment and caregiving and their perceptions about dementia care resources. The grounded theory method used in analyzing the interview data led to the development of a theory about dementia awareness in northern nursing practice.The study identified 3 categories of conditions that influence northern RNs' awareness of dementia: dementia care and community caregiving, characteristics of the northern RN, and northern nursing worklife. The findings suggest the need for educational programs and health-care policies that increase awareness of dementia in northern nursing practice and thereby improve the care provided to northern people.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.629
Threshold uncertainty score0.746

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.334 · 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 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

Citations9
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMed→Same topicIndigenous Studies and Ecology→French-language works237,207→