MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2912277778 · doi:10.18192/aporia.v10i2.4121

Unpacking “two-way” workplace integration of internationally educated nurses

2019· article· en· W2912277778 on OpenAlexfundvenueaboutno aff
Zubeida Ramji, Josephine Etowa, Isabelle St‐Pierre

Bibliographic record

VenueAporia · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGlobal Health Workforce Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Ottawa
KeywordsUnpackingDiversity (politics)Focus groupEquity (law)Health careTheme (computing)Qualitative researchSociologyQualitative propertyPublic relationsPsychologyNursingPolitical scienceMedicineSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents findings from a qualitative case study that explored long term integration of internationally educated nurses in an Ontario healthcare facility. Using critical social theory as the philosophical underpinnings for this research, we selected the case based on the hospital’s history of employing and supporting internationally educated professionals. Data sources included: documents review, twenty-eight interviews, socio-demographic survey and five focus groups involving IENs and other stakeholders. An overarching theme points to a ‘two-way’ notion of workplace integration whereby efforts are required on the part of the employer as well as the IENs. An in-depth analysis of the data reveals sub-processes of two-way integration: respecting diversity and difference, adopting inclusive practices and striving to achieve equity. Challenges in achieving two-way integration are discussed. Implications for nursing leaders to tap into IENs’ diverse talents for the benefit of their local healthcare systems are highlighted.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.092

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0140.028
Scholarly communication0.0120.011
Open science0.0020.019
Research integrity0.0030.004
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.445
Teacher spread0.409 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations19
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAporiaSame topicGlobal Health Workforce IssuesFrench-language works237,207