MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3006566406 · doi:10.12927/cjnl.2020.26098

Promoting Quality in Nursing Education in Canada through a Canadian Examination for Baccalaureate Nurses

2019· article· en· W3006566406 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Cynthia Baker

Bibliographic record

VenueNursing leadership · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicNursing Roles and Practices
Canadian institutionsCanadian Nurses Association
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMandateNursingNurse educationBaccalaureate DegreeQuality (philosophy)Medical educationMedicinePsychologyPolitical scienceHigher education

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since its creation in 1942, the Canadian Association of Schools of Nursing's mandate has been to foster high-quality nursing education in Canada in the interest of healthier Canadians. To this end, the Canadian Examination for Baccalaureate Nurses/l'examen canadien du baccalauréat en sciences infirmières (CEBN/ECBSI) has been developed and will be launched in 2020. Its purpose, what the Canadian Examination for Baccalaureate Nurses designation signifies and the development of the examination are described.

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 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)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Evaluation · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.995
Threshold uncertainty score0.409

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0060.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.238
GPT teacher head0.471
Teacher spread0.233 · 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

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
DomainEvaluation
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNursing leadershipSame topicNursing Roles and PracticesFrench-language works237,207