Modelo Comunidad Participante y su aplicación al trabajo con familias
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Se presentan los elementos principales del Modelo de Enfermeria Participante (Community-as- Partner) de Anderson y McFarlane (1996), basado en el Modelo Sistemico de Betty Neuman, describiendo la aplicacion realizada por profesores de la Escuela de Enfermeria de la Universidad Catolica de Chile en la ensenanza de la Enfermeria comunitaria y del trabajo con familias. Se definen conceptualmente la Comunidad y el Proceso de Enfermeria y se describen los conceptos propios del modelo en cada una de las etapas del proceso aplicado a comunidades y a familias, dando ejemplos. Se considera a la familia como comunidad, complementando la valoracion del nucleo con elementos del Modelo de Valoracion Familiar de Calgary y con otros de literatura cientifica abocada al tema de familia. Se concluye que el modelo ha demostrado ser de gran utilidad en pregrado para el trabajo con comunidad y familia; que se hace necesario recurrir al Modelo Sistemico de Betty Neuman para una mejor comprension de los conceptos y sus relaciones, y que el analisis y discusion entre los miembros del equipo de profesores del area de salud comunitaria ha sido de fundamental importancia para la comprension y aplicacion de conceptos del modelo.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".