What is the hidden curriculum, and how does it affect nursing students?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The hidden curriculum can be defined as that which is taught to studentsunintentionally by the culture, structure, and people of their educational setting.Although most authors agree on its importance, little is written about howthe hidden curriculum affects nursing students in both university and clinicalplacements. The purpose of this review is to take a broad look at the researchon the hidden curriculum in an attempt to better understand its current value andfuture potential, as it affects nursing students and the profession. A brief historyof the hidden curriculum is provided in relation to nursing education, followed bya review of the literature with a specific focus on the variety of educational andclinical applications in which it plays important roles. These topics arose frominteractions with peers, nurses, non-faculty staff, and other community members,all of which had potential impacts on the students. Ultimately, the hidden curriculumis an understudied, underappreciated component of education, and is one in whichstudents play a major personal role in developing. Both faculty and students need tounderstand the power and importance of this tool, as it has the capacity to shapethe future of the nursing profession.
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 | 0.006 | 0.028 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| 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".