Self-compassion in undergraduate nursing: an integrative review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective To explore self-compassion and its role in supporting well-being, compassionate care, and the academic experience in undergraduate nursing students. Method Whittemore and Knafl's (2005) integrative review methodology was used to search articles published between 2007 and 2020, which resulted in 36 articles meeting the inclusion criteria: compassion for self and others, strategies to support self-compassion; and self-compassion and student learning. Result Findings indicate that self-compassion may promote compassionate care, personal well-being, resilience, and emotional intelligence while supporting indicators of academic success. Compassion literacy, mindfulness training, and experiential exercises are some of the strategies that could be integrated into nursing curricula to enhance compassion in nursing students for self and others. Conclusion Integrating mindfulness and self-compassion in undergraduate curricula requires innovative teaching and learning approaches within a supportive organizational environment. To this end, a Self-Compassion Curricular Model to guide nursing programs is proposed.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".