A Scoping Review of the Literature on Internationally Educated Nurses in Canada: Mapping a Research Agenda
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this scoping review was to map key themes in the Canadian literature on the professional integration of internationally educated nurses (IENs), identify the types and sources of and gaps in evidence, and offer recommendations for research. The work was guided by a 6-step methodological framework for scoping reviews. The search and selection of academic and grey literature for the period 2000-13 resulted in a sample of 157 papers for full-text screening. Themes derived from the literature reflect stages of IENs' professional integration: pre-immigration and early arrival, professional recertification, workforce integration, and workplace integration. Data were extracted, coded, and collated using electronic charts. Numerical and qualitative thematic summaries were used to analyze the data. Recommendations for research are as follows: create data systems to track IEN immigration and integration; determine the effectiveness of programs and policies for IENs; and examine the influence of language proficiency on professional recertification, workplace integration, and patient safety.
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 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 | 0.016 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.010 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".