MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2996016387 · doi:10.1186/s12912-019-0390-7

“Guarding their practice”: a descriptive study of Canadian nursing policies and education related to medical cannabis

2019· article· en· W2996016387 on OpenAlex
Lynda G. Balneaves, Abeer A. Alraja

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Nursing · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCannabis and Cannabinoid Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCannabisMedicineNursingInclusion (mineral)Thematic analysisNursing researchDescriptive statisticsFamily medicinePsychiatryPsychologyQualitative research

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: In Canada, federal regulations allow Nurse Practitioners (NPs) to authorize medical cannabis. Nursing regulatory bodies, however, have been hesitant to include medical cannabis within NPs' scope of practice. As the interest in cannabis increases, NPs have the potential to play a pivotal role in promoting the safe and appropriate use of cannabis. This study aimed to: summarize nursing policies in Canada related to medical cannabis; explore the perspective of nursing regulatory bodies regarding practice and policy issues related to medical cannabis; and examine the inclusion of medical cannabis content within Canadian NP curricula. METHODS: A descriptive study was conducted that comprised three phases. The first phase reviewed nursing regulatory bodies' existing policies related to medical cannabis. In the second phase, practice consultants from nursing regulatory bodies were interviewed regarding policies and practices issues related to medical cannabis. The interviews were analyzed using thematic analysis. The third phase was a national survey of NP program coordinators regarding inclusion of cannabis in curricula. Descriptive statistics summarized survey responses. RESULTS: Of the 12 nursing regulatory bodies in Canada, only 7 had policies or statements related to cannabis, with only Ontario allowing NPs to authorize medical cannabis. There was confusion among practice consultants regarding the role of nurses in the administration of medical cannabis and several barriers were identified regarding nursing engagement in care related to medical cannabis, including lack of knowledge and clinical guidelines. 60% of NP programs included cannabis in their curricula, however, less than half addressed the risks and benefits of medical cannabis and dosing and administration protocols. Limited faculty expertise was a barrier to including cannabis content in NP curricula. CONCLUSION: Nursing regulatory bodies must be proactive in developing policies and educational resources that will support nurses in providing safe and informed care related to cannabis. To ensure patients using medical cannabis receive consistent and safe care from nurses, harmonized regulations and policies are needed across all jurisdictions. Education programs must also provide updated knowledge and training for both registered nurses and NPs that will support them in providing non-judgemental and evidence-based care to the growing number of individuals using cannabis.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.326
Threshold uncertainty score0.984

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.331 · 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