MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2044711847 · doi:10.12927/cjnl.2012.22805

Prince Edward Island: Building Capacity – The Implementation of a Critical Care/Emergency Program

2012· article· en· W2044711847 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Judith Cotton

Bibliographic record

VenueNursing leadership · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicDisaster Response and Management
Canadian institutionsHealth PEI
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMentorshipStaffingNursingCertificationEconomic shortageCapacity buildingMedical educationMedicinePsychologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Like other Canadian provinces, Prince Edward Island has a shortage of experienced nurses, especially in critical and emergency care. To increase the numbers of competent nurses, a PEI-based nursing course in these areas was identified as key to building capacity. This Research to Action pilot program successfully involved nurses in PEI-based emergency and critical care courses developed by the Nova Scotia Registered Nurses Professional Development Centre and funded by Human Resources and Skills Development Canada. The programs were offered on a full-time basis, lasted 14 weeks and included classroom and simulation laboratory time, along with a strong clinical component.Sixteen RNs graduated from the courses and became Advanced Cardiovascular Life Support (ACLS) certified. An additional 12 RNs were trained as preceptors. Feedback from participants indicates greater job satisfaction and increased confidence in providing patient assessments and care. Based on the program's success, the RTA partners proposed the establishment of an ongoing, PEI-based critical care and emergency nursing program utilizing 80/20 staffing models and mentorship. Their proposal was approved, with courses set to resume in January, 2012.

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)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.991
Threshold uncertainty score0.966

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0050.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.311
GPT teacher head0.501
Teacher spread0.190 · 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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNursing leadershipSame topicDisaster Response and ManagementFrench-language works237,207