MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Empowerment as a Process of Evolving Consciousness: A Model of Empowered Caring

2001· article· en· W2057707615 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 · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicCommunity Health and Development
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConceptualizationEmpowermentFocus groupPsychologyConsciousnessNursingNarrativeGrounded theoryQualitative researchHealth carePublic health nursingPublic healthSociologyMedicinePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This qualitative exploratory study used nominal group technique in a series of focus groups with public health nurses to identify their conceptualization of empowerment, the strategies they identified as empowering, and the outcomes of empowering strategies they observed in their practice. A model emerged from these data that conceptualized empowerment as a process of evolving consciousness in which increasing awareness, knowledge, and skills interacted with the clients' active participation to move toward actualizing potential. Clients, who nurses identified as having been empowered through their practice, were interviewed, and their narratives were examined for congruence with the model. The model that emerged from this study is solidly grounded in nursing practice, consistent with global approaches to public health and contemporary nursing theories, and supported by the perceptions of clients receiving nursing care.

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)0.001
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 score0.403
Threshold uncertainty score0.459

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.473
Teacher spread0.439 · 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