MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2894816097 · doi:10.5737/23688076284308313

Reaching professional consensus on pivot nurse in oncology interventions in the goal of staff planning in Quebec

2018· article· en· W2894816097 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Andréanne Saucier, Alain Biron

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Oncology Nursing Journal · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDelphi Technique in Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStaffingDelphi methodDelphiPsychological interventionNursingOncology nursingMedicineProfessional developmentWork (physics)PsychologyOncologyMedical educationNurse educationComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nearly 250 pivot nurse in oncology (PNO) are practising in Quebec to support cancer patients. Yet, it is increasingly obvious that this number is insufficient. A study was conducted to estimate the need for PNOs for the province. Professional consensus was reached using the nominal group technique and the Delphi method. The data obtained help to make staffing decisions based on findings measured in PNOs' current work reality. It is the authors' hope that these results will contribute to human resources planning that better meets the needs of cancer patients and their families.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.660
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
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 head0.165
GPT teacher head0.530
Teacher spread0.365 · 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.

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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Oncology Nursing JournalSame topicDelphi Technique in ResearchFrench-language works237,207