MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2053869009 · doi:10.2202/1548-923x.1727

A Narrative Study of the Experiences of Student Nurses Who Have Participated in the Hearing Voices that are Distressing Simulation

2009· article· en· W2053869009 on OpenAlex
Jane E. Wilson, Wendy Azzopardi, Shelley Sager, Brian Gould, Sherrill Conroy, Patricia E. Deegan, Suzanne Archie

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

VenueInternational Journal of Nursing Education Scholarship · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCommunication in Education and Healthcare
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityUniversity of WaterlooUniversity of AlbertaConestoga College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDistressingNarrativeThematic analysisPsychologyExperiential learningNarrative inquiryNurse educationSample (material)Medical educationNursingQualitative researchApplied psychologyMedicinePedagogyVisual arts

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of this study was to provide nursing students with an experiential learning opportunity which simulated living with the challenge of voice hearing. The purpose was to access understanding and insights of nursing students who completed "Hearing Voices that are Distressing: A Training Experience and Simulation for Students" (Deegan, 1996). Using a narrative research design and a convenience sample of 27 nursing students, participants were asked to respond in written format to three open ended prompts immediately following their participation in the simulation. Data generated was subjected to a thematic content analysis using a manual cut and paste approach to inductively find meanings and insights elicited from the respondents' actual words. Affirmed in this study was the use of this teaching tool to assist the students in their understanding of the challenges posed by voice hearing.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.210
Threshold uncertainty score0.280

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.292
GPT teacher head0.580
Teacher spread0.288 · 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