MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2155759049 · doi:10.1177/0898010103261120

Parse’s Theory in Practice

2004· review· en· W2155759049 on OpenAlexaff
Patricia A Hansen-Ketchum

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Holistic Nursing · 2004
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicNursing education and management
Canadian institutionsSt. Francis Xavier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPraxisParsingDiscernmentNursing theoryFoundation (evidence)Nursing practiceHolistic nursingOutcome (game theory)Formal concept analysisEpistemologyNursingPsychologyComputer scienceMedicineMEDLINEArtificial intelligencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Parse's theory of human becoming provides a foundation for understanding holistic nursing practice. The purpose of this article is to provide a description of Parse's theory based on an interpretive analysis of the author's nursing practice experiences. The interpretive analysis is not an outcome of formal study but results from reflective thought and journal writing. Details from reflections on nursing care experiences were analyzed for the concepts, processes, and rhythms inherent to Parse's theory. Praxis of Parse's theory creates the opportunity for nurses, patients, and families to reach profound dimensions of the human experience and participate in multidimensional healing. Outcomes of praxis for nurses also include personal and professional growth as well as discernment of holistic nursing practice.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.981
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.088
GPT teacher head0.450
Teacher spread0.361 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations12
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Holistic NursingSame topicNursing education and managementFrench-language works237,207