MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2098656468 · doi:10.5430/jnep.v4n1p88

“A Day in the Life”: A simulated experience

2013· article· en· W2098656468 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Narisa Waldo, Melinda Hermanns, Mary LuAnne Lilly

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Nursing Education and Practice · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInnovations in Medical Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExperiential learningTheme (computing)PsychologySchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)Applied psychologyMedical educationPedagogyMedicinePsychiatryComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An experiential learning activity titled, “A Day in the Life” was implemented with nineteen baccalaureate nursing students in order to achieve a holistic understanding of the challenges faced by persons living with Schizophrenia and a physical disability, such as a fracture in an upper extremity or a visual impairment. The role play simulation required that students interact with public transportation and community resources, while assuming the role of a person with Schizophrenia and a physical disability. Using a qualitative descriptive methodology, reflective journals, aesthetic expressions, and post conference discussions about “A Day in the Life” were reviewed and analyzed by the authors. Two major themes were identified from the journal data: Changed Person, and Eye-Opening. Exemplars illustrating each theme are provided in the manuscript. Based on the results of this study, the authors believe that the role play simulation, “A Day in the Life” was effective in helping students to achieve a holistic understanding of the challenges faced by persons living with Schizophrenia and a physical disability. Further use of this experiential learning activity, with multi-method evaluation, along with short and long term follow-up is recommended.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.480
Teacher spread0.405 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations4
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Nursing Education and PracticeSame topicInnovations in Medical EducationFrench-language works237,207