Should Nurses Be Knowledge Brokers? Competencies and Organizational Resources to Support the Role
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Registered nurses with graduate preparation are in a unique position to act as knowledge brokers owing to their extensive clinical experience and ability to be seen as a credible and respected resource by their peers. Nurse knowledge brokers can bridge the gap between research producers and those that need evidence for decision-making and support capacity development for evidence-informed decision-making (EIDM). Knowledge broker competencies include graduate-level education with exposure to research methods; experience with the EIDM process; and established networking skills to bring researchers, decision-makers, stakeholders and policymakers together. For the knowledge broker to be successful, the nurse leader can cultivate an organizational culture supportive of evidence use with advocacy for mandates that require evidence for decisions, structures in place for each stage of the EIDM process, and physical resources such as library services for evidence retrieval.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it