Nursing Students' Perceptions, Beliefs and Attitudes: A First Study on Special Pedagogic Activities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Studying nursing students' opinions could be a useful guide for the formation of their professionalrole as well as their education and training.Aim: The present study's aim is to examine nurse students' opinion, beliefs and attitude regarding the conceptsof health, health care, health education, health ethics, illness, safety in health care and quality in health care, inan educational environment which promotes cooperative activities in class.Methodology: Seventy four nurse students of the University of Peloponnese participated in the present studyduring the winter semester of 2008-2009. They were asked to describe shortly the meaning of the study concepts,writing down their opinion on a questionnaire that included six questions. Their answers were evaluated usingthe method of content analysis and sorted to exhaustive and mutually exclusive categories.Results: Nursing Students were asked to describe the meaning of the concept of health, health care, healtheducation, health ethics, illness, safety in health care and quality in health care. The result of the students'opinion reveals the way they conceive their professional role, their education and their attitude in real workingconditions and, therefore, the quality of the services they provide and how well prepared they are to demand andto put in a claim for the quality in health care.Conclusions: Further empirical research could aim to replicate or contradict these findings, using a larger sampleand recruiting more university departments.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".