MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2107898477 · doi:10.12927/cjnl.2000.16301

Practice Patterns Of Acute Care Nurse Practitioners

2000· article· en· W2107898477 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Souraya Sidani, Susan Irvine, Haley Porter, L O'Brien-Pallas, Beverley Simpson, Linda M. Hall, Laura Nagel, J Graydon, Alba DiCenso, D. Redelmeir

Bibliographic record

VenueNursing leadership · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicNursing Roles and Practices
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAcute careNursingIsolation (microbiology)Nurse practitionersMedicineScope of practiceWork (physics)Qualitative researchData collectionPsychologyHealth careSociologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study was undertaken to examine the practice pattern of nurse practitioners employed in Ontario acute care settings. A descriptive design, incorporating quantitative and qualitative methods for data collection, was used. The acute care nurse practitioners' practice pattern varied in terms of scope of practice, model guiding practice, reporting relations, and extent of role implementation. Role implementation encompassed activities representing the four role components: clinical practice, education, administration or management, and research. The acute care nurse practitioners engaged most frequently in the clinical component of the role. They performed medical and advanced nursing functions. They emphasized that they do not work in isolation and that they do not replace physicians or residents.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.117
Threshold uncertainty score0.233

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.166
GPT teacher head0.449
Teacher spread0.283 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations34
Published2000
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNursing leadershipSame topicNursing Roles and PracticesFrench-language works237,207