MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2117361966 · doi:10.3917/rsi.121.0018

La difficile relation des soins infirmiers avec le savoir

2015· article· fr· W2117361966 on OpenAlexaff
Clémence Dallaire

Bibliographic record

VenueRecherche en soins infirmiers · 2015
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth, Medicine and Society
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophyPolitical scienceSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cet article affirme l’existence et la nécessité du savoir infirmier en l’expliquant à l’aide de quelques repères tirés d’autres disciplines, il en retrace brièvement l’évolution dans une perspective surtout nord-américaine, il examine sa présence dans les travaux de soins infirmiers avant de dégager un certain nombre de constats et discuter brièvement deux explications aux constats entourant le savoir disciplinaire et son développement par la communauté des soins infirmiers. En conclusion, la nécessité d’apprendre, d’analyser, de tester et d’utiliser le savoir infirmier sera réitérée.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.029
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.987
Threshold uncertainty score0.157

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.029
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0130.012
Scholarly communication0.0100.006
Open science0.0020.010
Research integrity0.0040.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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 head0.433
GPT teacher head0.494
Teacher spread0.060 · 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.

Study designQualitative
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

Citations20
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRecherche en soins infirmiersSame topicHealth, Medicine and SocietyFrench-language works237,207