Use of a Script Concordance Test to Assess Development of Clinical Reasoning in Nursing Students
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
The methods for assessing and measuring clinical reasoning as it pertains specifically to nurses are inadequate, if not nonexistent. The purposes of this methodological study were to develop a script concordance test and conduct a preliminary validation of its psychometric qualities. A script concordance test was created and the test scoring grid was constructed using the combined-score method and based on the responses of a panel of 15 experts. Thirty first-year bachelor of nursing students completed the test. The scores for the experts and students were compared with a t test, and the reliability of the scores was measured by Cronbach's alpha coefficient. A statistically significant difference was found between the scores of the experts and novices. The scores' reliability is high. The script concordance test is an innovative instrument that provides a standardized method for assessing nurses' clinical reasoning.
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 | 0.001 | 0.047 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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