Script Concordance Approach in Nursing Education
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The script concordance approach aims at triggering judgments in simulated contexts of uncertainty. PROBLEM: Nursing students need to be prepared to manage the uncertainty of clinical practice. APPROACH: The purpose of this article is to describe the theoretical foundation and the pedagogical use of the script concordance approach, as well as to present the current state of nursing evidence on the subject. The script concordance approach includes (1) script concordance testing, which is a quantitative examination that evaluates clinical reasoning; (2) a face-to-face script concordance activity; and (3) a digital educational strategy based on script concordance delivered via an online teaching/learning platform that aims to support clinical reasoning development. CONCLUSIONS: Relying on questioning and experts' modeling, the script concordance offers an innovative pedagogical approach that approximates the uncertainty of clinical practice.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it