Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: For all our successes, many urgent health problems persist, and although some of these problems may be explored with established research methods, others remain uniquely challenging to investigate-maybe even impossible to study in the real world because of practical and pragmatic obstacles inherent to the nature of the research question. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this review article is to introduce agent-based modeling (ABM) and simulation and demonstrate its value and potential as a novel research method applied in nursing science. METHODS: An introduction to ABM and simulation is described. Examples of current research literature on the subject are provided. A case study example of community nursing and opioid dependence is presented. RESULTS: The use of ABM and simulation in human health research has increased dramatically over the past decade, and meaningful research is now commonly found published widely in respected, peer-reviewed journals. Absent from this list is innovative ABM and simulation research published by nurse researchers in nursing-specific journals. DISCUSSION: ABM and simulation is a powerful method with tremendous potential in nursing research. It is vital that nursing embrace and adopt innovative and advanced research methods if we are to remain a progressive voice in health research, practice, and policy.
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.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.002 |
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 it