MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2058311795 · doi:10.1515/ijnes-2012-0034

Arts-Based Learning: Analysis of the Concept for Nursing Education

2013· article· en· W2058311795 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

VenueInternational Journal of Nursing Education Scholarship · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicArt Education and Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaRed River College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCurriculumThe artsNurse educationLifelong learningFormal concept analysisPsychologyReflection (computer programming)CognitionPedagogyNursingComputer scienceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Teaching and learning strategies are needed to support learner-centered curricula, and prepare nurses who are capable of working in today's challenging health care environments. Although the traditional lecture is still widely used in nursing education, innovative approaches are needed to encourage discussion, debate, and critical reflection, activities that support lifelong learning. Arts-based learning [ABL] is a creative strategy with the potential to engage learners, foster understanding of multiple perspectives, and simultaneously connect cognitive and affective domains of learning. Walker and Avant's method of concept analysis is applied to examine the uses of ABL in the literature, define the attributes, distinguish the antecedents and consequences, identify model and other cases, and determine empirical referents of this concept. This analysis is presented to facilitate the conceptual understanding of ABL for use in research and nursing education.

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)0.000
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.446
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.100
GPT teacher head0.414
Teacher spread0.314 · 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