Nursing students' perceptions of their experiences with fathers during their family nursing clinical practicum
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is consensus that supporting fathers' involvement in their children's care is essential and that nurses can play an important role, facilitating this process. There is little evidence about how nurses' education as family nurses enable them to work with fathers. This study aimed to explore undergraduate nursing students' perceptions of their experience with fathers during family nursing clinical practicum. An exploratory descriptive qualitative study allowed twelve nursing students to participate in a one-hour interview, at a university of Central Canada. The critical incident technique was used for data collection and analysis was done with N Vivo7. Four themes reflected students' experiences: Experiencing critical events with fathers; Perceiving fathers and father involvement as important; Building a relationship with fathers and Reflecting upon formal education and clinical practicum. Family nurses need to revisit their attitudes towards fathers and make space for this important member of the family in health care situations.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it