MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2095067378 · doi:10.1097/ans.0b013e31828077bc

Contemplating the Fit and Utility of Nursing Theory and Nursing Scholarship Informed by the Social Sciences and Humanities

2013· article· en· W2095067378 on OpenAlexaff
Marjorie McIntyre, Carol McDonald

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in Nursing Science · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicEthics in medical practice
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScholarshipDisciplineExtant taxonSociologyEpistemologyInterrogationNursing theoryPsychologyNursingSocial scienceMEDLINEMedicinePolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article, authors contend that a lack of familiarity with philosophical thinking undermines the ability of students and subsequently practicing nurses to theorize for themselves. Engagement with philosophical ideas propels nurses well beyond the unthinking "application" of extant theory, to theorizing, that is, using theoretical formulations to engage with the significant phenomena we encounter in the world of human health. The authors present a framework to guide philosophical interrogation of knowledge, with a focus on the utility of both disciplinary knowledge and knowledge from the social sciences and humanities.

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 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)0.016
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.318
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0160.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.032
Scholarly communication0.0000.003
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.180
GPT teacher head0.568
Teacher spread0.387 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations10
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in Nursing ScienceSame topicEthics in medical practiceFrench-language works237,207