MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2329158001 · doi:10.1177/0840470416629163

The role of nurses and nurse leaders on realizing the clinical, social, and economic return on investment of nursing care

2016· review· en· W2329158001 on OpenAlexaff
Judith Shamian, Moriah Ellen

Bibliographic record

VenueHealthcare Management Forum · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate Change and Health Impacts
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInvestment (military)NursingOrder (exchange)BusinessHealth careReturn on investmentPsychologyPublic relationsEconomicsMedicineFinancePolitical scienceEconomic growthProduction (economics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is a limited understanding of the significance and the potential contribution that nursing can make through practice, policy, science, and profession to the global health agenda. In this article, we present some of the evidence to demonstrate the clinical, social, and economic returns on investment in nursing. We conclude by addressing the issues that nurse and system leaders need to address in order to achieve these returns on investments, and unless nurses get involved at the leadership level, these returns on investment will not be attained.

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 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: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.979
Threshold uncertainty score0.674

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
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 head0.179
GPT teacher head0.454
Teacher spread0.275 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
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

Citations17
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealthcare Management ForumSame topicClimate Change and Health ImpactsFrench-language works237,207