Nurse Leaders’ Experiences of Implementing Regulatory Changes in Sexual Health Nursing Practice in British Columbia, Canada
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
Most research about regulatory policy change concerning expanded nursing activities has emphasized advanced practice roles and acute care settings. This study is a contribution to the small pool of research concerned with regulatory policy implementation for nurses undertaking expanded nursing practice activities in a public health context. Using the regulatory changes in certified nursing practice in one Canadian province as our starting point, we investigated the experiences of nurse leaders in implementing this change. Using a qualitative interpretive descriptive approach informed by tenets of complexity theory, we examined the experiences of 16 nurse leaders as situated within the larger public health care system in which nurses practice. Two interrelated themes, (a) preparing for certification and (b) the certification process, were identified to illustrate how competing and contrasting demands between health care and regulatory organizations created substantial barriers to policy change. Implications for health service delivery and future research are discussed.
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 | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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