MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2164570796 · doi:10.22605/rrh2061

Rural nursing education: a photovoice perspective

2012· article· en· W2164570796 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueRural and Remote Health · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicParticipatory Visual Research Methods
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhotovoiceNursingWorkforceNurse educationRural areaRural healthMedicineNursing researchHealth carePolitical scienceEconomic growth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: For many rural Canadians nursing care is the primary and often the sole access point to health care. As such, rural nurses are an invaluable resource to the health and wellbeing of rural populations. However, due to a nursing workforce that is aging and retiring, limited resources and support, healthcare reform issues, and other factors, these rural professionals are in short supply. Because of limited opportunities to learn about rural practice settings, nursing students may be reluctant to select rural practice locations. Relevant and effective educational initiatives are needed to attract nursing students to underserved rural and remote communities so that rural people receive the health care they require. The purpose of this study was to explore the use of the innovative research approach called photovoice as an educational strategy to foster learning about and interest in rural locations and rural nursing as future practice settings. Fostering of interest in rural may help to address nursing workforce shortages in rural settings. METHODS: Thirty-eight third and fourth year nursing and health sciences students enrolled in an elective 'Rural Nursing' course used the qualitative research method photovoice to take photographs that represented challenges and facilitators of rural nursing practice. They then engaged in written reflection about their photos. Photos were to be taken in rural settings of their choice, thus fostering both urban and rural student exposure to diverse rural communities. RESULTS: One hundred forty-four photos and reflections were submitted, representing students' appreciation of diverse facilitators and challenges to rural nursing practice. Facilitators included technology, a generalist role, strong sense of community, and slower pace of life. Challenges included inadequate rural education in undergraduate nursing programs, professional isolation, safety issues, few opportunities for professional development, lack of anonymity, and insider/outsider status. Exemplar photos and reflections are provided. CONCLUSIONS: The photovoice research approach used in this rural education endeavour proved to be very useful in fostering students' exposure to, interest in, and understanding of rural settings and their influence on rural nursing practice. Photovoice is also recommended for use in rural courses other than nursing. Suggested strategies include group photovoice experience and the expansion of reflection to enhance rural health research.

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.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.755
Threshold uncertainty score0.989

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.386
GPT teacher head0.651
Teacher spread0.266 · 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