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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Health-care students are frequently concerned and anxious about entering the mental health setting for their clinical placement. There are many situations in mental health clinical settings in which the student will witness or become involved in incidents that may challenge existing values, attitudes, ethics and provoke strong emotions in the student. This paper examines clinical critical incidents that have been identified and reflected on by a cohort of second-year student nurses while undertaking their mental health clinical practicum. Data were gathered from 260 critical incident reports and was sorted into three broad categories: (i) student description of incident; (ii) immediate emotional response of the student to the incident; and (iii) student thoughts and feelings' about the incident after the opportunity for structured reflection. The findings demonstrate a wide range of positive, but predominantly, negative experiences. Witnessing psychotic behaviour and incidents involving both actual and threatened violence and verbal abuse dominated the critical incidents with 52% describing one or both of these issues. To illustrate the range of student-identified critical incidents, verbatim examples of student work are included.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it