A comparison of degree and diploma nursing students confidence of patient safety competency in Ontario, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Ontario, Canada, Registered Nurses and Practical Nurses practice autonomously and safely in the healthcare system. Students who are aiming to become a Registered Nurse are enrolled in a four-year university baccalaureate degree program while students pursuing a practical nursing diploma are registered in a two or three-year college program. Exploring differences in confidence levels could provide insight into whether one type of nursing educational program is assisting students to develop higher confidence levels on patient safety topics. The Health Professional Education in Patient Survey was used for data collection in this research study. In total, 206 practical nursing students and 458 degree nursing students participated in this study from four different academic settings in Ontario, Canada. Overall, students in both types of educational programs expressed similar levels of confidence on the seven patient safety subscales. Practical nursing students feel errors are viewed as individual mistakes and they fear repercussions when they make a mistake more so than degree students. Although the categories of students receive different education in terms of length of program, setting, and depth of content, students within either type of program appear to develop confidence levels that are similar for the most part.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".