MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The impact of managed care on nurses’ workplace learning and teaching<sup>*</sup>

2000· article· en· W2076552802 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueNursing Inquiry · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducational Environments and Student Outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoYork UniversityCarleton UniversityRegistered Nurses' Association of OntarioWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNursingContext (archaeology)Focus groupManaged careHealth carePsychologyMedicineMedical educationSociologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper examines the impact of managed care on the informal learning process for nurses in a major US-based health organisation. Through the analysis of focus group data we report the nurses' view of the effect recent changes have had on the nurse/patient/care relationship. Managed care, our research indicates, has transformed the learning milieus for nurses with two effects. First, nurses have seen their need for informal learning increase while the time and context for that learning has diminished. Second, the process of teaching patients and families has also been adversely affected even as managed care creates the need for more patient education. We report the analysis of the data collected at group interviews involving nurses working in both hospital and community settings of a leading US-based HMO. All interviews took place during September of 1997 at various sites in California. This study is part of a larger Social Science Research Council of Canada funded investigation into managed care in the US and Canada.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.364
Threshold uncertainty score0.944

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.385
Teacher spread0.364 · 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