MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2061173287 · doi:10.1097/ans.0b013e318271d127

The Primacy of Relationships

2012· article· en· W2061173287 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 · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicCommunity Health and Development
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRelevance (law)Public health nursingNursing theoryPublic healthNursing practiceNursingFocus groupScope (computer science)PsychologyResistance (ecology)MEDLINEMedicineSociologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Critical caring is a midrange theory proposed as a framework to guide public health nursing practice. This article reports findings of a study that examined the relevance of the theory to the practice of expert public health nurses (PHNs). Twenty-six PHNs participated in this study: 10 in interviews and 16 in 2 focus groups. Findings support the relevance of critical caring to PHN practice, explicated, and further refined the theory through the richness of participants' practice accounts As such, it has potential as a tool of resistance to forces that limit PHNs working to their full scope of practice.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.497
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.085
GPT teacher head0.537
Teacher spread0.453 · 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