Development of the International Guidelines for Home Health Nursing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Throughout the world, healthcare is increasingly being provided in home and community-based settings. There is a growing awareness that the most effective, least costly, patient-preferred setting is patients' home. Thus, home healthcare nursing is a growing nursing specialty, requiring a unique set of nursing knowledge and skills. Unlike many other nursing specialties, home healthcare nursing has few professional organizations to develop or support its practice. This article describes how an international network of home healthcare nurses developed international guidelines for home healthcare nurses throughout the world. It outlines how the guidelines for home healthcare nursing practice were developed, how an international panel of reviewers was recruited, and the process they used for reaching a consensus. It also describes the plan for nurses to contribute to future updates to the guidelines.
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 | 0.086 | 0.152 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.016 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.016 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
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".