MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Toward a Critical Theoretical Interpretation of Social Justice Discourses in Nursing

2006· review· en· W2327959158 on OpenAlexaff
Sheryl Reimer‐Kirkham, Annette J. Browne

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in Nursing Science · 2006
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicFood Security and Health in Diverse Populations
Canadian institutionsMichael Smith Health Research BCTrinity Western UniversityWestern University
FundersNational Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities
KeywordsSociologyIndividualismInterpretation (philosophy)Distributive justiceEpistemologySocial justiceEconomic JusticeRelevance (law)Social psychologyEnvironmental ethicsPsychologyCriminologyPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite widespread appeals to social justice, nursing conceptions of this ideal have been critiqued as incomplete and inconsistent. With the aim of contributing to a critical dialogue on discourses of social justice in nursing, we explore contemporary theories of social justice and their move beyond a distributive paradigm, employing techniques of replication and critique of social justice discourses in nursing. We consider how postcolonial feminist theory can help us understand the relevance of more recent critical interpretations of social justice, particularly in reinterpreting and broadening nursing's individualistic focus on social justice so that due consideration and actions are directed toward the intersecting impact of historically and socially mediated conditions on health and human suffering.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.076

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0080.007
Science and technology studies0.0050.038
Scholarly communication0.0120.015
Open science0.0030.006
Research integrity0.0060.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.114
GPT teacher head0.597
Teacher spread0.483 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations143
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in Nursing ScienceSame topicFood Security and Health in Diverse PopulationsFrench-language works237,207