Nursing education in Brazil: A look at holism in care
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: In Brazil, the holism, which is the opposite of fragmentation, emerges as a new paradigm in the process of Nursing Education, favoring the articulation between the curative and preventive dimensions, the clinical, epidemiological and social focuses, and the collective and individual approaches, in the sense of reorienting the current teaching-learning process. The current study sought to analyze clues expressed by participants involved in the process showing ways that would allow transformation of the teaching process both at micro and macro political levels. Methods : Qualitative case study, guided by the theoretical and philosophical frameworks of the constructivist historical and cultural approach, developed with 11 professors and 12 students. The techniques utilized for data collection were individual interviews in a semi-structured format and documental analysis. The analysis of the interviews and documents was done under the scope of dialectic hermeneutics. Results: Respondents point to holism as a multidimensional and interactive approach. However, there is a need to balance the biomedical model with a fuller, more wholesome practice. They report the need for articulation between the institutions’ micro and macro political levels for the achievement of holistic care. Conclusions: Despite the prevalence of the highly specialized biomedical model in health, integrality of care in nursing is recognized as an ideal practice, supported by a multidimensional approach, with senses that transcend purely biological matters. In regards to holism in care in the teaching of nursing, a preponderant relation between teaching and offer of care was detected, being imperative the involvement of multiple actors in the construction of curricula.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".