MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2586535659

The Nunavut Nursing Program: A Retrospective Reflection

2016· article· en· W2586535659 on OpenAlexaffabout
Nancy Edgecombe, Anita Robertson

Bibliographic record

VenueNorthern review · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicIndigenous Studies and Ecology
Canadian institutionsNunavut Arctic CollegeDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCircumpolar starIndigenousBachelorArcticCurriculumNurse educationNursingMedical educationSociologyMedicineGeographyPedagogyArchaeologyOceanographyEcology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Dalhousie Bachelor of Science in Nursing (BScN, Arctic Nursing) program, delivered through Nunavut Arctic College, admitted its first students in 2000. There have been forty-eight graduates, seventeen of whom are Inuit. The Arctic nursing program’s focus on Indigenous education is unique in many ways due to the remote setting and relationship to the territory of Nunavut. The program is currently undergoing a curriculum revision. As part of the review process, we have evaluated and reflected on the expectations and goals of the program over the years, as well as on our successes and disappointments. In this report, we share our journey, the challenges and the solutions, and the students’ perspectives on the program’s benefits. This report is part of a special collection from members of the University of the Arctic Thematic Network on Northern Nursing Education. The collection explores models of decentralized and distributed university-level nursing education across the Circumpolar North. This report is part of a special collection from members of the University of the Arctic Thematic Network on Northern Nursing Education. The collection explores models of decentralized and distributed university-level nursing education across the Circumpolar North.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.984
Threshold uncertainty score0.376

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0140.005
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.452
Teacher spread0.396 · 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

Citations7
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNorthern reviewSame topicIndigenous Studies and EcologyFrench-language works237,207