Développement de la compétence culturelle infirmière : perspective d’étudiantes de leur environnement d’apprentissage lors d’un stage clinique à l’international
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: In nursing education, the organization of international placements and the support offered to students is widely different from one program to another. CONTEXT: In relation to the perspective of nursing students, few research works explore the elements of the learning environment that interact with their ability to open up to the different realities of nursing practice in the context of an international placement. OBJECTIVE: Guided by a constructivist cultural competence development model, this qualitative case study explored the elements of the learning environment that interact with the development of nursing practice in culturally diverse contexts through an international clinical placement. METHOD: A qualitative case study has been conducted. Ten students who had recently been on an international placement participated in an individual in-depth interview. A thematic data analysis was done. RESULTS: The results of this study highlight three interrelated themes: getting support through multiple collaborations, finding one's place in the host environment, and perceiving a gap between the expectations of the students and the lived experience. These themes deepened our understanding of learning environments in students' cultural competence development, particularly regarding their ability to open up to the different realities of practice in a culturally diverse context. DISCUSSION: This study contributes to defining the learning environment by integrating support as a collaboration with multiple partners. CONCLUSION: This study is an addition to current knowledge regarding the interactions between the learning environment and the development of cultural competence in nursing.
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 | 0.010 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".