MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Faculty Clinical Practice: Strategies for Implementaion and Evaluation

2001· article· en· W2026836731 on OpenAlexaff
K Ward

Bibliographic record

VenueNursing Forum · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInnovations in Medical Education
Canadian institutionsQueen Elizabeth II Health Sciences Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyMedical educationMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To assist nurse educators who may be initiating clinical practice activities for the first time.

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)0.489
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.616
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.489
Threshold uncertainty score0.630

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.4890.616
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0110.007
Science and technology studies0.0150.011
Scholarly communication0.0290.024
Open science0.0070.020
Research integrity0.0100.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.155
GPT teacher head0.579
Teacher spread0.424 · 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.

Study designObservational
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

Citations5
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueNursing ForumSame topicInnovations in Medical EducationFrench-language works237,207