MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2951761668 · doi:10.3912/ojin.vol23no03man05

Preparing Today’s Nurses: Social Determinants of Health and Nursing Education

2018· article· en· W2951761668 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Marleen Thornton, Sabita Persaud

Bibliographic record

VenueOJIN The Online Journal of Issues in Nursing · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicFood Security and Health in Diverse Populations
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniformed Services University of the Health SciencesHealth Resources and Services AdministrationUniversiteit GentCouncil of Academic Programs in Communication Sciences and DisordersAcademy of Nutrition and DieteticsAssociation of Schools and Programs of Public HealthAmerican Speech-Language-Hearing AssociationPhysician Assistant Education AssociationAmerican Association of Colleges of Osteopathic MedicineAmerican Psychological AssociationUniversity of TorontoKaiser PermanenteJosiah Macy Jr. FoundationAmerican Dental Education AssociationRobert Wood Johnson FoundationAmerican Association of Colleges of PharmacyNational League for NursingAetna Foundation
KeywordsSocial determinants of healthHealth equityMandateNursingHealth educationHealth careCurriculumEquity (law)Occupational health nursingCall to actionHealth policyGlobal healthNurse educationPsychologyPolitical scienceMedicinePublic healthPedagogyBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reducing health inequity in the United States is a social mandate for nursing in the 21st century. The World Health Organization and others have defined and identified multiple social determinants of health (SDOH) that may negatively impact patient health and contribute to health inequity. Nurses, on the frontlines of healthcare, are uniquely positioned to assess for social determinants of health and positively address health equity. The purpose of this article is to explore social determinants of health and nursing education, including clinical and classroom opportunities. We also discuss faculty development and diversity as a strategy of impact, and conclude with a call to action and recommendations for nurse educators working to include SDOH in nursing program curricula.

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Commentary
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Not applicablehigh
grokno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Other
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Theoretical or conceptualhigh
opusno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Commentary
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Not applicablehigh
models splitAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.119
GPT teacher head0.558
Teacher spread0.439 · 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

Labeled directly by 3 models reading the full record.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.

The models disagree on parts of this classification; every voice is preserved in the section at the end of the page.

Study designNot applicable · Theoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary · Other

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

Citations128
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOJIN The Online Journal of Issues in NursingSame topicFood Security and Health in Diverse PopulationsFrench-language works237,207