MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Nurse Migration: A Canadian Case Study

2007· article· en· W2124133248 on OpenAlexaffabout
Lisa Little

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Services Research · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGlobal Health Workforce Issues
Canadian institutionsCanadian Nurses Association
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWorkforceNursingBeneficiaryNursing shortageBusinessMedicineEmigrationImmigration policyImmigrationNurse educationEconomic growthPolitical scienceEconomicsFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To synthesize information about nurse migration in and out of Canada and analyze its role as a policy lever to address the Canadian nursing shortage. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Canada is both a source and a destination country for international nurse migration with an estimated net loss of nurses. The United States is the major beneficiary of Canadian nurse emigration resulting from the reduction of full-time jobs for nurses in Canada due to health system reforms. Canada faces a significant projected shortage of nurses that is too large to be ameliorated by ethical international nurse recruitment and immigration. CONCLUSIONS: The current and projected shortage of nurses in Canada is a product of health care cost containment policies that failed to take into account long-term consequences for nurse workforce adequacy. An aging nurse workforce, exacerbated by layoffs of younger nurses with less seniority, and increasing demand for nurses contribute to a projection of nurse shortage that is too great to be solved ethically through international nurse recruitment. National policies to increase domestic nurse production and retention are recommended in addition to international collaboration among developed countries to move toward greater national nurse workforce self sufficiency.

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)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.960
Threshold uncertainty score0.291

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.007
Science and technology studies0.0220.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.137
GPT teacher head0.594
Teacher spread0.457 · 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 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

Citations46
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealth Services ResearchSame topicGlobal Health Workforce IssuesFrench-language works237,207