Aboriginal Recruitment and Retention in Nursing Education: A Review of the Literature
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
Increasing diversity in the nursing workforce is a means to promote quality health care for multicultural populations. Though Aboriginal people comprise 4% of the Canadian population, Aboriginal nurses represent less than 1% of the nursing workforce. Despite isolated efforts in nursing education, Aboriginal students are neither recruited nor retained in nursing programs at a rate significant enough to close this gap. A literature review was conducted to identify the current state of knowledge on recruitment and retention of Aboriginal people in nursing education programs. Thirty six articles met inclusion criteria, and major themes were identified and organized according to characteristics of students and academic environments. Characteristics of academic environments were further segmented by secondary school, classroom, program, and university levels. With published literature in its infancy, we suggest an organizing strategy based on a decolonizing multiple intervention and evaluation approach, and commitment from Aboriginal-university partnerships, governments and the health professions.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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