MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3023400545 · doi:10.1097/ans.0000000000000310

Men's Decision-Making to Become Nurses

2020· article· en· W3023400545 on OpenAlexaff
Chad O’Lynn, Tom O’Connor, Liliana Herakova, Peter Kellett

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in Nursing Science · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender Roles and Identity Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Lethbridge
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOperationalizationWorkforcePatriarchyPsychologyContext (archaeology)Qualitative researchSocial psychologyDiversity (politics)Conceptual frameworkSociologyGender studiesPolitical scienceEpistemologySocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Patriarchy has been offered as the foundational paradigm for gendered issues in nursing; however, operationalization of this paradigm in order to improve nursing workforce gender diversity is challenging. The qualitative arm of the present study explored men's decision-making to become nurses within a larger gendered context. Findings were then assessed for fit with Gender Role Conflict Theory. Findings suggest that men undergo a process in which contrasting influences are considered. The findings' congruence with gender role conflict theoretical assumptions suggests suitable conceptual fit for male recruitment and retention actions and further research.

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 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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.755
Threshold uncertainty score0.753

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.406
Teacher spread0.388 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
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

Citations12
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in Nursing ScienceSame topicGender Roles and Identity StudiesFrench-language works237,207