Measurement of cultural competency: A pilot study of nurses' knowledge of religious practices
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Most studies assessing cultural competence inquire about attitudes and beliefs and do not measure mastery of information. In this study, we investigate how much nurses know about various religious practices they might encounter.Methods: An open response examination with 90 questions regarding Judaism, Islam, Hinduism, Mormonism, Seventh Day Adventist and Evangelical Christianity was administered to 24 faculty members and 60 students.Results: The mean score on the exam was 22.8 out of 100 (students 23.3%; faculty 21.6%). The sub-scores were highest for questions about Judaism (mean 36.3%) and lowest for questions about Hinduism (12.7%). The answer “I don’t know” was offered in response to 67.3% of all questions.Discussion: Factual mastery by nurses regarding religious practices was seen to be low. Because providing culturally competent care demands nurses to be both willing and able, this preliminary finding suggests that delivering culturally competent care requires not only awareness and readiness but a better factual knowledge base.
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".