MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3112338990 · doi:10.29173/cjen37

Advancing Emergency Nurses’ Leadership and Practice through Informatics

2020· article· en· W3112338990 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Christopher Picard, Manal Kleib

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Emergency Nursing · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicElectronic Health Records Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTriageEmergency nursingInformaticsHealth informaticsHealth careNursingEmergency departmentData collectionNursing researchMedicineInformation technologyMedical emergencyResource (disambiguation)Knowledge managementComputer sciencePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Collection of data in healthcare is vitally important to inform healthcare resource planning and monitor effectiveness of care. The Canadian Emergency Department information System and Canadian Triage Acuity Scale are primary tools for collecting such data. Although emergency nurses use these tools to collect significant patient and healthcare data on daily basis, their understanding of the purposes and implications for collecting these data is sub-optimal. Furthermore, emergency nurses’ awareness about informatics, and the limited representation in information and communication technology strategic initiatives and research within Canadian emergency nursing are some barriers preventing nurses from realizing the full benefits of information and communication technology to improve patient and system outcomes, and nursing knowledge development. The National Emergency Nurses Association is well positioned to provide the leadership required to move nurses from being data collectors, to information users by maximizing their potential to advance Canadian emergency nursing practice through informatics.

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)0.032
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.085
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.141
Threshold uncertainty score0.281

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0320.085
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0070.006
Scholarly communication0.0120.005
Open science0.0020.011
Research integrity0.0020.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.003

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 head0.183
GPT teacher head0.466
Teacher spread0.283 · 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
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

Citations3
Published2020
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Emergency NursingSame topicElectronic Health Records SystemsFrench-language works237,207