MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2041026505 · doi:10.1177/1744987112439836

Educating nurses about pain: Revolution not evolution is required

2012· article· en· W2041026505 on OpenAlexaffabout
Eloise Carr

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of research in nursing · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInnovations in Medical Education
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNursingPsychologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The preparation of healthcare practitioners is the foundation platform upon which a career in healthcare is built. This preparation is strictly regulated with content and competences clearly articulated. That said the challenge to ensure that pain is a competency of every nurse has not yet been endorsed in the UK. Here in Canada the Canadian Nurses Association stipulates that the competencies required of a registered nurse will include pain assessment, prevention and management. The alignment of competencies with the needs of the population is essential. The preparation of nurses should be closely aligned with the health needs of the population and attempts have been made to move the focus from hospital to community settings; with a resultant shift from an emphasis on disease to health and wellness. There is a greater focus on the management of long-term conditions and recognition that much of the care will take place in community settings. It would seem logical that the content and competences required for registration reflects the growing burden of chronic illness as evidenced by high prevalence rates in the UK for hypertension, cardiovascular disease, diabetes and obesity to name a few (Craig and Mindell, 2008). The survival rates for cancer are increasing which is good news but many people experience chronic pain due to their treatment. It would appear that we are not good at managing pain. It has been reported to be suboptimal in hospitals and the community for over 40 years and yet the alignment between educational preparation of health professionals to manage pain and the burden of chronic pain in the population appear to be grossly mismatched. The reasons for this are many but the one which is most agreed upon is that the pre-registration pain education, across the professions, is woefully inadequate. A survey conducted in Canada across universities and health professions, including veterinary medicine, found that veterinary students received five times the pain education of doctors (Watt-Watson et al. 2009). This prompted media attention and the appearance of a large dog on the front page of Maclean’s magazine (Canadian current affairs) with the caption ‘your dog gets better healthcare than you’. The same study was adapted and replicated in the UK and revealed similar findings with

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.728
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.096
GPT teacher head0.505
Teacher spread0.410 · 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.

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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of research in nursingSame topicInnovations in Medical EducationFrench-language works237,207