Building and sustaining a postgraduate student network: The experience of oncology nurses in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Networking with individuals on a similar journey through graduate studies has been identified as an important influence in the experience of doctoral and postdoctoral students. Through the Board of Directors of the Canadian Association of Nurses in Oncology/Association canadienne des infirmières en oncologie (CANO/ACIO), student members were encouraged to establish a Doctoral Student Network (DSN) that would enable a connection through education and common interest in oncology and cancer care. Since its inception, the DSN has been dynamic in how it has addressed the evolving needs of members and in providing development opportunities to group members. To uncover and describe key aspects of its evolution, a document analysis was undertaken to reveal themes pertaining to capacity development and leadership voice as paths to leadership for DSN members. The results of this study suggest that the DSN provides a supportive environment for postgraduate nurses across Canada to connect with others in their peer group to foster engagement in educational, professional, and scholarly activities, as well as highlighting opportunities for other professional organizations interested in establishing a support network for graduate student members.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".