MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2138666445 · doi:10.12927/cjnl.2004.16353

Help Us Chart a Course for Canada's Nursing Professions

2004· article· en· W2138666445 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Mary Ellen Jeans, Verna Holgate

Bibliographic record

VenueNursing leadership · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGlobal Health Workforce Issues
Canadian institutionsCanadian Nurses AssociationUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChartNursingCourse (navigation)PsychologyMedical educationMedicineEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Building the Future Over the past two years, many nurse leaders have participated in Building the Future, the first national study led and endorsed by Canada’s nursing stakeholder groups. The study’s overriding goal is to develop an integrated, longterm labour market strategy for Licensed Practical Nurses (LPNs), Registered Nurses (RNs) and Registered Psychiatric Nurses (RPNs). Through interviews, surveys, focus groups and other strategies, the first phase of the study is focused on gathering current, comprehensive information on all aspects of the nursing labour market. These efforts are helping us paint a current picture of nursing human resources, project long-term requirements, develop options to improve retention and recruitment, and assist in developing an integrated strategy for nursing human resources in Canada. We will soon be moving into the second phase of the study, which will involve consultations with provincial governments as well as nursing stakeholder groups to achieve consensus on key issues and possible solutions. The input of nursing leaders will be extremely valuable in this phase. Building the Future urges you to participate and to collaborate with our stakeHelp Us Chart a Course for Canada’s Nursing Professions

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)0.002
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.944
Threshold uncertainty score0.404

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0180.003
Scholarly communication0.0070.002
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0060.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0960.021

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 head0.254
GPT teacher head0.457
Teacher spread0.203 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations0
Published2004
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNursing leadershipSame topicGlobal Health Workforce IssuesFrench-language works237,207