MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2733031228

Why Exemplary Oncology Nurses Seem to Avoid Compassion Fatigue presented at the 20th Annual Canadian Association of Nurses in Oncology (CANO) Conference in St. John's, NF, September 14-17, 2008

2008· article· en· W2733031228 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Beth Perry

Bibliographic record

VenueAUSpace (Athabasca University) · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicEthics in medical practice
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCompassionCompassion fatiguePresentation (obstetrics)PsychologyTest (biology)NursingMedicineMedical educationClinical psychologySurgeryPolitical science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

My contribution was well received. Some excellent questions were raised. For example there were nurses attending who had been experiencing compassion fatigue (CF). They asked if the fact that they had experienced CF meant that they were not exemplary nurses. This excellent question caused me to re think aspects of the upcoming research project on this same topic. The critique by my colleagues was helpful in clarifying aspects of subsequent investigations. Many people commented that they found the presentation materials reawakened in them their own lived experience which is the test of phenomenology. I judge the experience as positive in many ways.

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 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)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.654
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.004
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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.390
Teacher spread0.327 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAUSpace (Athabasca University)Same topicEthics in medical practiceFrench-language works237,207