MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Advanced practice nursing roles: development, implementation and evaluation

2004· article· en· W2077960084 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

VenueJournal of Advanced Nursing · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicNursing Roles and Practices
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTerminologyVariety (cybernetics)Scope of practiceNursingMandateScope (computer science)StakeholderNursing practiceMedicineRestructuringConfusionHealth careNursing researchPsychologyPublic relationsPolitical scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIM: The aim of this paper is to discuss six issues influencing the introduction of advanced practice nursing (APN) roles: confusion about APN terminology, failure to define clearly the roles and goals, role emphasis on physician replacement/support, underutilization of all APN role domains, failure to address environmental factors that undermine the roles, and limited use of evidence-based approaches to guide their development, implementation and evaluation. BACKGROUND: Health care restructuring in many countries has led to substantial increases in the different types and number of APN roles. The extent to which these roles truly reflect advanced nursing practice is often unclear. The misuse of APN terminology, inconsistent titling and educational preparation, and misguided interpretations regarding the purpose of these roles pose barriers to realizing their full potential and impact on health. Role conflict, role overload, and variable stakeholder acceptance are frequently reported problems associated with the introduction of APN roles. DISCUSSION: Challenges associated with the introduction of APN roles suggests that greater attention to and consistent use of the terms of the terms advanced nursing practice, advancement and advanced practice nursing is required. Advanced nursing practice refers to the work or what nurses do in the role and is important for defining the specific nature and goals for introducing new APN roles. The concept of advancement further defines the multi-dimensional scope and mandate of advanced nursing practice and distinguishes differences from other types of nursing roles. Advanced practice nursing refers to the whole field, involving a variety of such roles and the environments in which they exist. Many barriers to realizing the full potential of these roles could be avoided through better planning and efforts to address environmental factors, structures, and resources that are necessary for advanced nursing practice to take place. CONCLUSIONS: Recommendations for the future introduction of APN roles can be drawn from this paper. These include the need for a collaborative, systematic and evidence-based process designed to provide data to support the need and goals for a clearly defined APN role, support a nursing orientation to advanced practice, promote full utilization of all the role domains, create environments that support role development, and provide ongoing evaluation of these roles related to predetermined goals.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.953
Threshold uncertainty score0.703

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.534
Teacher spread0.479 · 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