MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2061406358 · doi:10.1177/152715402237441

Preparing Nurses to Promote Health-Enhancing Public Policies

2002· article· en· W2061406358 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

VenuePolicy Politics & Nursing Practice · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicNursing Education, Practice, and Leadership
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRestructuringNurse educationHealth policyPublic policyHealth carePublic relationsPublic healthNursingPolitical scienceElement (criminal law)Medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nursing leadership in policy development continues to be acknowledged as an important aspect of professional practice. The past decade of health services restructuring has led to a renewed emphasis on nursing’s role in health care policy; however, there is also a need to focus more broadly on policies outside the health care sector that influence health. A critical question is how to prepare nurses to influence the development of “healthy public policy.” This article describes shifts in thinking about policy in health and what this portends for nursing education. The authors argue that comprehensive preparation in public policy for nurses is an essential element of graduate education. The article describes faculty and student perspectives and experiences in the first offerings of the nursing graduate course, Promoting Health-Enhancing Public Policy. The article concludes with recommendations that may assist students to acquire knowledge regarding the policy process and approaches to policy advocacy.

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)0.013
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Insufficient 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.903
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.407
Teacher spread0.338 · 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