MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2060174604 · doi:10.5430/jnep.v3n6p43

Active methodologies as strategies in nursing teaching: Raising awareness towards healthy habits

2012· article· en· W2060174604 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Luciara Fabiane Sebold, Silvana Silveira Kempfer

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Nursing Education and Practice · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHealth Education and Validation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGraduation (instrument)Raising (metalworking)NursingMedical educationFood habitsPhysical activityPsychologyMedicineEnvironmental healthPhysical therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: To identify how the use of active methodology may influence healthy habits in nursing students. Method: A qualitative Assistential Convergent Research, undertaken with 43 students of the Nursing Graduation Course, at a Federal University in Southern Brazil. Data were collected with a semi-structured tool, from May to July 2008. Data were organized into categories and analysed according to scientific publications in the area. Results: Three study categories raised from the study: Characterization of Nursing Students from the study, Contributions of teaching-learning active methodologies in raising awareness towards healthy habits, and Healthy habits: feeding and physical exercising. They recognize healthy habits and practice it in their routine, it was detected that 16% are overweight, do not exercise regularly, consider their food, leisure, sleeping patterns and self-image to be adequate. Conclusion: The use of active methodologies may unfold new possibilities towards healthy habits practices.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.472
GPT teacher head0.647
Teacher spread0.175 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Nursing Education and PracticeSame topicHealth Education and ValidationFrench-language works237,207