MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2899401861 · doi:10.1097/ans.0000000000000232

Cultivating Praxis Through Chinn and Kramer's Emancipatory Knowing

2018· article· en· W2899401861 on OpenAlexaff
Jessica Peart, Karen MacKinnon

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in Nursing Science · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicNursing Education, Practice, and Leadership
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPraxisMandateSocial injusticeSociologySocial justiceInjusticeSituatedSocial workAction (physics)PedagogyEngineering ethicsNursingEnvironmental ethicsPublic relationsPsychologyPolitical scienceSocial psychologyMedicineSocial scienceLawPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nursing actions in support of equitable health and social relations have always been central to the work of our discipline. The mandate for social justice advocacy is identified in many of our professional and ethical frameworks, with systems-level advocacy situated as a core competency for advanced practice nurses. And yet, the sociopolitical processes that generate health inequities are not always readily understood by nurses. Emancipatory knowing provides an accessible lens to reveal how social injustice occurs while delineating a practical structure through which reflective action can be undertaken toward social change, otherwise known as nursing praxis.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.742
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0000.005
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.373 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations14
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in Nursing ScienceSame topicNursing Education, Practice, and LeadershipFrench-language works237,207