MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2159971819 · doi:10.1177/0894318409344768

The Humanbecoming Leading‐Following Model in Practice

2009· article· en· W2159971819 on OpenAlexaff
Thomas J. Doucet, Françoise Maillard‐Strüby

Bibliographic record

VenueNursing Science Quarterly · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicNursing education and management
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNursing theoryLived experienceNursing practiceColumn (typography)Key (lock)EpistemologyPsychologyNursingSociologyMedicineMEDLINEComputer sciencePolitical sciencePhilosophyPsychoanalysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this column is to illustrate how the humanbecoming leading-following model was lived by nurses practicing within hospital, community, and school settings. The authors describe practice scenarios to show ways that nurses guided by the humanbecoming theory lived the processes and the key ideas of the model. One example addresses a change of policy, as the nurse lived the humanbecoming beliefs and values in leading-following. This column is nursing theory-guided evidence-based 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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.861
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.347 · 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
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

Citations3
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNursing Science QuarterlySame topicNursing education and managementFrench-language works237,207