MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2732207676 · doi:10.1002/nop2.496

The role of registered nurses in primary care and public health collaboration: A scoping review

2020· review· en· W2732207676 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

VenueNursing Open · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicNursing Roles and Practices
Canadian institutionsDalhousie UniversityUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntrapersonal communicationFacilitatorNursingChecklistOutreachMedicineInterpersonal communicationPublic healthHealth carePrimary careScope of practicePsychologyFamily medicinePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aim: The purpose of this work was to examine the roles of Registered Nurses (RNs) in primary care (PC) and public health (PH) collaboration. Additionally, we aimed to explore whether the current scope of practice for RNs is adequate to support their roles in PC/PH collaboration. Design: A scoping review of current literature relating to the RN's role in PC/PH collaboration was conducted using the PRISMA 2009 checklist. Methods: The review used key terms: primary care, public health, collaboration, nursing and nurse role across six electronic databases; 23 articles that were included in the final review were published over a 7-year span. Results: Four key RN roles relating to PC/PH collaboration were identified: relationship builder, outreach professional, programme facilitator and care coordinator. RNs supported transitions in chronic disease, communicable disease care and maternity care at various healthcare system levels including systemic, organizational, intrapersonal and interpersonal levels.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.807
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.246
GPT teacher head0.563
Teacher spread0.316 · 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