MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3028016135 · doi:10.5737/23688076294247252

Refonte et mise en œuvre d’un programme canadien de formation sur les soins infirmiers en oncologie en vue d’un partenariat international

2019· article· fr· W3028016135 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Karelin Martina, Lucia Ghadimi, Anet Julius, Diana Incekol, Pamela Savage

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Oncology Nursing Journal · 2019
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldMedicine
TopicPalliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Le cancer est l’une des principales causes de décès et d’invalidité dans le monde. Les infirmières doivent donc prodiguer des soins spécialisés à un nombre croissant de patients avec des cas de cancer complexes. Toutefois, de nombreux établissements de soins ne disposent pas de programmes spécialisés de formation en soins infirmiers oncologiques; les patients atteints de cancer sont alors pris en charge par des infirmières généralistes. Pour combler cette lacune, des infirmières en pratique avancée du Centre de cancérologie Princess Margaret ont restructuré l’un de leurs programmes pour offrir de la formation spécialisée en oncologie au personnel infirmier qui s’occupe de patients cancéreux. Le but du présent article est de décrire l’expérience de refonte et de prestation d’un programme canadien de formation spécialisée en soins infirmiers oncologiques (FSSIO) au Moyen-Orient, plus précisément au Qatar, de même que les enseignements tirés de ce projet international collaboratif.

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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.025
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.946
Threshold uncertainty score0.107

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.005
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0010.009
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.098
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.295 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Oncology Nursing JournalSame topicPalliative Care and End-of-Life IssuesFrench-language works237,207