MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3100190627 · doi:10.1097/ans.0000000000000339

Advancing Nursing Policy Advocacy Knowledge

2020· article· en· W3100190627 on OpenAlexaff
Patrick Chiu

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in Nursing Science · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicNursing Education, Practice, and Leadership
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNormativePolicy advocacyPolitical actionPoliticsNursingAction (physics)Patient advocacyPolitical scienceEconomic JusticeMedicinePublic relationsSociologyPsychologyMEDLINELaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nursing policy advocacy continues to be recognized as a key part of a nurse's role by educators, professional associations, and regulators. Despite normative calls on nurses to engage in political action and advocacy, limited theories, models, and frameworks exist to support this practice within nursing. Using Walt and Gilson's Health Policy Triangle Framework, this article explores the theoretical underpinnings of policy advocacy to enhance nursing's contemporary role in advancing social justice. Specific consideration is placed on the type of nursing and policy knowledge and perspectives required to understand policy content, contexts, processes, and actors.

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)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.859
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.004
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.400
Teacher spread0.379 · 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.

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

Citations7
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in Nursing ScienceSame topicNursing Education, Practice, and LeadershipFrench-language works237,207