Regulation of nursing practice in the Region of the Americas
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
OBJECTIVE: To describe and analyze the current nursing regulations across countries in the Region of the Americas. METHODS: A country comparative analysis was carried out by gathering information from the ministries of health, nursing schools, councils, associations, and boards in 2018. The main categories evaluated were type of regulatory bodies, requirements for initial professional registration, and registration renewal. RESULTS: All countries regulate the nursing profession through a regulatory body. Competency exams for initial registration are required in the United States, Canada, and most Caribbean countries. Registration renewal is required in 54.3% of the countries. Continuing education is required for professional registration renewal in the United States, Canada, and 53% of Caribbean countries. Labor hours are required in the United States and Canada. CONCLUSION: Regulations promote and protect professional integrity. The Pan American Health Organization/World Health Organization recommends that countries make efforts to evaluate competency and training, consider the use of competency exams for initial registration, and add continuing education as requirements for registration renewal.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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