MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Transcultural Nursing Theory From a Critical Cultural Perspective

2005· review· en· W2054432903 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

VenueAdvances in Nursing Science · 2005
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCultural Competency in Health Care
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerspective (graphical)Transcultural nursingNursing theorySociologyCritical theoryEpistemologyNursing careOutcome (game theory)Health carePsychologyNursingMEDLINEMedicinePolitical scienceComputer sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This critical cultural discourse analysis explores the internal logic of Transcultural Nursing Theory and interrogates the underlying assumptions, goals, and strategies of this approach to race and other human and social differences. Drawing on examples from nursing textbooks and policy documents, I assert that Transcultural Nursing Theory operates from a liberal standpoint that focuses attention on a broadly defined, but narrowly applied, concept of culture. The goal of providing culturally competent care and the processes used to achieve that outcome reinforce, rather than transform, the social practices and relations that institutionalize the dominant approach to social and human differences.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.747
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.012
Scholarly communication0.0000.004
Open science0.0020.000
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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.534
Teacher spread0.475 · 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