MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Challenges and opportunities in graduate nursing education by distributed learning in Canada and Brazil

2009· article· en· W2171525241 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista gaúcha de enfermagem · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicOnline and Blended Learning
Canadian institutionsCollege & Association of Registered Nurses of AlbertaUniversity of VictoriaUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWorkloadFlexibility (engineering)ExcellenceGraduate educationMedical educationCriticismNurse educationNursingQuality (philosophy)Subject (documents)MedicineEngineering ethicsPolitical scienceEngineeringComputer scienceManagementLibrary science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, the authors share their experience related to graduate nursing programs offered by distributed learning (DL) in Canada and Brazil. Although degrees offered by DL are often the subject of criticism, the authors' experience has been that learning outcomes have been very good. Nevertheless, a number of challenges and opportunities have been encountered including those associated with flexibility of the program, delivering practice courses at a distance, facilitating interaction, faculty workload and preparation and student support, Newer technologies that may assist in this effort are identified. Despite the challenges encountered, students rate the program highly and ongoing efforts are underway to ensure excellence of such flexible innovative graduate programs in nursing. The authors argue that despite the challenges, DL programs offer high quality graduate education that meets the needs of many nurses.

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)0.001
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.977
Threshold uncertainty score0.844

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.076
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.280 · 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