MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

NURSE LEADERSHIP PRACTICES IN PRIMARY HEALTH CARE: A GROUNDED THEORY

2016· article· en· W2534813318 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueTexto & Contexto - Enfermagem · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth, Nursing, Elderly Care
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGrounded theoryNursingQualitative researchMeaning (existential)Health careContext (archaeology)Work (physics)MedicinePsychologySociologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT This is a qualitative study and its aim was to understand the meaning of nurse leadership exercised in the services of Primary Health Care in a municipality located in Southern Region of Brazil. Grounded Theory was used as methodological framework. Data collection was carried out with semi-structured interviews applied to 30 nurses who worked in Primary Health Care and nursing professors, divided into four groups, between 2011 and 2012. After the analysis process, nine categories emerged and sustained the phenomenon 'Revealing the nursing leadership practices in the complex context of Primary Health Care'. Leadership was understood as a resource in the process of caring/managing people and developing a team of leaders, intending the organization and qualification of health work. It is important to rescue the clinical work of nurses, in order to keep their investment in the health team and to strengthen the binomial leader/caregiver.

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 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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.695
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.623
GPT teacher head0.573
Teacher spread0.050 · 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