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: Although nursing students practice skills in labs as part of the curriculum, many report feeling anxious and unprepared for their first clinical experience. PURPOSE: A capstone lab, integrating gaming with simulation, was implemented to assimilate previous learning and promote critical thinking before beginning clinical experiences. METHODS: Second-year baccalaureate nursing students participated in a gamified lab with simulated scenarios working in teams in various roles to manage patient situations. Remediation opportunities throughout the lab and formal structured debriefing further maximized their learning. RESULTS: Students reported the lab was beneficial. Most students found the lab "stressful, but in a good way," which challenged them to apply previous learning. Most students cited reduced anxiety and increased confidence for practice after the labs. CONCLUSIONS: Integrating gaming with simulated scenarios maintained student engagement while encouraging critical thinking and knowledge synthesis to better prepare them for clinical experiences.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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