MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2099021367 · doi:10.1177/0894318405277632

Nursing Practice With Aboriginal Communities: Expanding Worldviews

2005· review· en· W2099021367 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

VenueNursing Science Quarterly · 2005
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIndigenous Health, Education, and Rights
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBridging (networking)EpistemologySociologyNursing theoryNursing practiceEmpiricismHealth carePsychologyNursingMEDLINEMedicinePolitical scienceComputer sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Through advances in interpretive inquiry, diverse ways of knowing and experiencing reality are increasingly made explicit in nursing literature. Nevertheless, the privileges of empiricism continue alongside a lack of language to consider other realms of reality. In this column, Aboriginal ways of constituting health and reality are explored. Morley's four categorizations of health belief systems provide a useful tool for understanding diverse worldviews. In contrast, Atleo drew on Nuu-chah-nulth origin stories to address the complexities and ambiguities of Aboriginal health beliefs. Approaches for bridging cultural differences are explored with a view toward inclusive healthcare and nursing practice.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.767
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0230.006
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0020.000
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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.468
Teacher spread0.418 · 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