MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2121062100 · doi:10.1177/0193945910361595

The Self as Role Model in Health Promotion Scale: Development and Testing

2010· article· en· W2121062100 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

VenueWestern Journal of Nursing Research · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth and Wellbeing Research
Canadian institutionsOkanagan University CollegeUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCronbach's alphaOperationalizationExploratory factor analysisScale (ratio)Health promotionPromotion (chess)Reliability (semiconductor)Variance (accounting)PsychologyPublic healthTest (biology)Construct validityApplied psychologyPsychometricsNursingMedicineClinical psychologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Historically, nurses have been expected to be role models of health promotion, conceptualized and operationalized narrowly and indirectly as the practice of healthy behaviors. The purpose of the current study was to develop and test an instrument (The Self as Role Model for Health Promotion [the SARMHEP]) to measure nurses' perceptions of themselves as role models. Data were collected from nurses working in public health, nursing education, and general practice with a 56% return rate. A series of exploratory factor analyses elicited a five-factor solution that accounted for 44% of the variance and approximated the theoretical dimensions that guided the instrument's development. Cronbach's alpha for the total scale was .91. The new multidimensional SARMHEP was shown to have beginning validity and reliability.

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)0.024
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.637
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0240.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.004
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 head0.226
GPT teacher head0.561
Teacher spread0.335 · 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