MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2426550232 · doi:10.6224/jn62.4.63

[Applying the Modified Delphi Technique to Develop the Role of HIV Case Managers and Essential Nursing Competencies in HIV Care].

2015· article· en· W2426550232 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Nai‐Ying Ko, Chia-Yin Hsieh, Yen‐Chin Chen, Chen Hsi Tsai, Hsiao Ying Liu, Li Fang Liu

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCore competencyDelphi methodMedicineNursingHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV)DelphiMedical educationHealth careFamily medicineBusinessPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Since 2005, the Taiwan Centers for Disease Control (Taiwan CDC) initiated an HIV case management program in AIDS-designated hospitals to provide integrative services and risk-reduction counseling for HIV-infected individuals. In light of the increasingly complex and highly specialized nature of clinical care, expanding and improving competency-based professional education is important to enhance the quality of HIV/AIDS care. PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to develop the essential competency framework for HIV care for HIV case managers in Taiwan. METHODS: We reviewed essential competencies of HIV care from Canada, the United Kingdom, and several African countries and devised descriptions of the roles of case managers and of the associated core competencies for HIV care in Taiwan. The modified Delphi technique was used to evaluate the draft framework of these roles and core competencies. A total of 15 HIV care experts were invited to join the expert panel to review and rank the draft framework. RESULTS: The final framework consisted of 7 roles and 27 competencies for HIV case managers. In Round 1, only 3 items did not receive consensus approval from the experts. After modification based on opinions of the experts, 7 roles and 27 competencies received 97.06% consensus approval in Round 2 and were organized into the final framework for HIV case managers. These roles and associated core competencies were: HIV Care Expert (9 competencies), Communicator (1 competency), Collaborator (4 competencies), Navigator (2 competencies), Manager (4 competencies), Advocate (2 competencies), and Professional (5 competencies). CONCLUSIONS/IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The authors developed an essential competency framework for HIV care using the consensus of a multidisciplinary expert panel. Curriculum developers and advanced nurses and practitioners may use this framework to support developments and to ensure a high quality of HIV care.

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)0.064
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.067
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.064
Threshold uncertainty score0.340

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0640.067
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.004
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.218 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMed→French-language works237,207→