MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A European Union and Canadian Review of Public Health Nursing Preparation and Practice

2012· review· en· W2105013350 on OpenAlex
Ann Hemingway, Clara Aarts, Liisa Koskinen, Barbara Campbell, France Chassé

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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenuePublic Health Nursing · 2012
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicNursing Roles and Practices
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MonctonUniversity of Prince Edward Island
FundersPublic Health Agency of CanadaWorld Health Organization
KeywordsDeclarationPublic healthNursingNursing practiceEuropean unionHealth careMedicineVariety (cybernetics)Clinical PracticePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: This study explores the preparation and role of the public health nurse (PHN) across European Union (EU) countries (Finland, Sweden, and the United Kingdom) and Canadian provinces (Alberta, New Brunswick, and Prince Edward Island). METHODS: A literature review including relevant peer reviewed articles from 2000 on, in conjunction, with critical debate was undertaken. The results were considered in relation to the three essential areas of PHN practice, outlined in the World Health Organization (Moving on from Munich: A reference guide to the implementation of the declaration on nurses and midwives: A force for health, 2001b) recommendations, family oriented care, public health action, and policy making. RESULTS: The major challenge the review revealed across a variety of international education and practice environments was the lack of consistent preparation for and engagement with leadership and policy making in 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)0.051
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.838
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0510.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
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 head0.334
GPT teacher head0.552
Teacher spread0.219 · 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