MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3106668037 · doi:10.2196/17765

Open and Distance Learning Programs for Nursing and Midwifery Education in East Africa: Protocol for a Scoping Review

2020· review· en· W3106668037 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kahabi Isangula, Grace Edwards, Tumbwene Mwansisya, Columba Mbekenga, Eunice Pallangyo, Ahmed M. Sarki, Eunice Ndirangu‐Mugo

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCOVID-19 and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProtocol (science)NursingMedicineNurse educationMedical educationAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: In the face of growing modernity and the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, open and distance learning (ODL) is considered to play an important role in increasing access to education worldwide. There is a robust evidence base demonstrating its cost effectiveness in comparison with conventional class-based teaching; however, the transition to this new paradigm of learning for nursing and midwifery courses has been difficult in low-income countries. While there are notable efforts to increase internet and education access to health care professionals, not much is known about ODL for nurses and midwives in East African countries. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this scoping review is to understand whether ODL programs for nursing and midwifery education exist, the drivers of their adoption, their implementation, the topics/courses covered, their acceptability, and their impacts in East African countries. METHODS: The scoping review methodology employs the framework developed by Arksey and O'Malley. Using an exploratory approach, a two-stage screening process consisting of a title and abstract scan and a full-text review will be used to determine the eligibility of articles. To be included, articles must report on an existing ODL initiative for nurses and midwives in Uganda, Tanzania, and Kenya. All articles will be independently assessed for eligibility by pairs of reviewers, and all eligible articles will be abstracted and charted in duplicate using a standardized form. RESULTS: Details of ODL for nursing and midwifery education initiatives and study outcomes will be summarized in a table. The extracted data will undergo exploratory descriptive analysis, and the results will be classified into learner and clinical outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Evidence on ODL for nursing and midwifery education will inform the ongoing development and restructuring of health care professional education in East Africa amidst the COVID-19 pandemic. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): PRR1-10.2196/17765.

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)0.093
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.078
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.093
Threshold uncertainty score0.492

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0930.078
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0050.005
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0100.012
Bibliometrics0.0130.011
Science and technology studies0.0050.005
Scholarly communication0.0080.009
Open science0.0050.007
Research integrity0.0090.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0680.015

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 head0.761
GPT teacher head0.754
Teacher spread0.007 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations9
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research Protocols→Same topicCOVID-19 and Mental Health→French-language works237,207→