Mentorship programs for nurse educators accompanying nursing students on international placements to low-middle-income countries: a scoping review protocol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This scoping review will synthesize literature on mentorship programs for nurse educators who accompany nursing students on international placements to low-middle-income countries. INTRODUCTION: University nursing programs have been increasingly incorporating global health education into their curricula. Nurse educators play a significant role in the provision of international clinical experiences for nursing students by supporting and developing confidence and clinical competence. The contribution of nurse educators can affect a student's decision to remain in the profession, suggesting that providing quality professional development for nurse educators is a worthwhile investment. The challenges that come with this role require the development of a mentorship program for nurse educators who accompany nursing students on international placements to low-middle-income countries. INCLUSION CRITERIA: This scoping review will include studies that consider mentorship programs for nurse educators who accompany nursing students on clinical placements in low-middle-income countries. This scoping review will consider experimental and quasi-experimental studies, qualitative studies, text and opinion papers, dissertations, theses, conference reports, and gray literature. Studies published within the previous 40 years will be included as a systematic approach to global education started in the early 1980s. METHODS: Databases to be searched include MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), CINAHL (EBSCO), PsycINFO (Ovid), Sociological Abstracts (ProQuest), and Global Health (Ovid). Following screening, all identified citations will be collated. Titles and abstracts will be screened by two independent reviewers. Potentially relevant studies will be retrieved in full and assessed for inclusion. Data will be extracted by two independent reviewers and presented in diagrammatic or tabular format and accompanied by a narrative summary.
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 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 | 0.004 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".