Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nursing Inquiry has now passed its 10th year and the journal continues to be groundbreaking in its contribution to scholarship and its outreach to researchers and thinkers from around the world. In Nursing Inquiry we provide a forum for cross-disciplinary intellectual projects, encourage the rethinking of approaches and perspectives, and endeavour to air new ideas and hear new voices from scholars around the world who are concerned about nursing practice, patient care and our healthcare systems. The popularity of the journal, as evidenced by submissions, subscriptions and downloads of papers, continues to grow, particularly in North America. We are extremely fortunate to find ourselves now supported by a wide community of scholars who represent a range of disciplines and disciplinary approaches. These scholars work hard for Nursing Inquiry, reviewing papers, encouraging submissions and promoting the journal around the world. A new phase in our internationalisation, and evolution from an Australian journal to an international institution, is taking place in 2006 as Professor Judith Parker, whose creative vision and intellectual curiosity led to the establishment of this very different nursing journal, steps down as Editor-in-Chief. Judy will now assume the role of Asia-Pacific Editor and will continue to be acknowledged as the Founding Editor. Dr Margarete Sandelowski, North American Editor, and Professor Veronica James, European Editor, step down from these key roles and join the editorial board in 2006. Both Margarete and Nicky have been wonderful ambassadors for Nursing Inquiry and we are greatly indebted to them for their efforts. I am delighted to announce that Professor Michael Traynor of the University of Middlesex is to assume the role of European Editor. Michael has been an industrious and committed supporter of the journal, a tireless reviewer and a great exemplifier of the breadth of intellectual scholarship that Nursing Inquiry represents. It is my very great honour to assume the role of Editor-in-Chief, and, in line with my relocation to North America as Dean, at the Faculty of Nursing, University of Toronto, I will also take over the North American portfolio. The editorial office will likewise be relocating to Toronto over the course of 2006 and we will also be moving to online submission using Manuscript Central. Other changes are in store as the new editorial team takes shape. Once again I'd like to thank Margarete and Nicky for their work over the years, to welcome Michael and Judy (in her new role), and to thank all our readers and Blackwell Publishing for their support of Nursing Inquiry.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.013 | 0.026 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.024 | 0.014 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.011 | 0.023 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.028 | 0.019 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".