MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2048613375 · doi:10.1097/naq.0b013e318295f5ec

Practice-Academia Collaboration in Nursing

2013· article· en· W2048613375 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueNursing Administration Quarterly · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicNursing Roles and Practices
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScholarshipReciprocity (cultural anthropology)NursingService (business)Service delivery frameworkQuality (philosophy)Health careMedicinePublic relationsPsychologyMedical educationPolitical scienceBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

At a time of profound challenges in health care delivery and professional education characterized by imperatives to improve quality, responsiveness to client needs and efficient use of existing resources, the relationship between nursing education and service is in deep need of reinforcement and rethinking. Important directions for the future include attending to the complementary roles of academia and service in ensuring patient- and family-centered care, building reciprocity in the relationship between clinical agencies and universities, clarifying the intersecting roles of clinical agencies in the generation of various types of research and scholarship, engaging nurses and trainees at all roles within the profession in local- and higher-level health policy, and reinventing joint roles between service and academia.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.592
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.479
Teacher spread0.449 · 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