MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3199518922 · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2021-052634

Influence of organisational attributes on registered nurse contributions to well-child care: a scoping review protocol

2021· review· en· W3199518922 on OpenAlexaff
Suzanne Braithwaite, Julia Lukewich, Danielle Macdonald, Joan Tranmer

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Open · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicSchool Health and Nursing Education
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of NewfoundlandLoyalist CollegeQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineProtocol (science)NursingHealth services researchPublic healthAlternative medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Universal access to preventative healthcare is essential to children's health. Registered nurses (RN) are well positioned to deliver well-child care within primary care settings; however, RN role implementation varies widely in this sector and the scope of literature that examines the influence of organisational attributes on nursing contributions to well-child care is not well understood. The aim of this scoping review is to identify the scope and characteristics of the literature related to organisational attributes that act as barriers to, or facilitators for RN delivery of well-child care within the context of primary care in high-income countries. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The Joanna Briggs Institute scoping review methodology will be used to conduct this review. Databases that will be accessed include Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), MEDLINE and Embase. Inclusion criteria includes articles with a focus on RNs who deliver well-child care in primary care settings. Literature that meets this inclusion criteria will be included in the study. Covidence software platform will be used to review citations and full-text articles. Titles, abstracts and full-text articles will be reviewed independently by two reviewers. Any disagreements that arise between the reviewers will be resolved through discussion, or with an additional reviewer. Data will be extracted and organised according to the dimensions outlined in the nursing care organisation conceptual framework (NCOF). Principles of the 'best fit' framework synthesis will guide the data analysis approach and the NCOF will act as the framework for data coding and analysis. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This scoping review will undertake a secondary analysis of data already published and does not require ethical approval. Findings will be disseminated via peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations targeting stakeholders involved in nursing practice and the delivery of well-child care. TRIAL REGISTRATION DETAILS: Braithwaite, S., Tranmer, J., Lukewich, J., & Macdonald, D. (2021, March 31). Protocol for a Scoping Review of the Influence of Organisational Attributes on Registered Nurse Contributions to Well-child Care. https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/UZYX5.

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)0.129
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.103
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 score0.129
Threshold uncertainty score0.680

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1290.103
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.006
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0120.013
Bibliometrics0.0230.017
Science and technology studies0.0050.005
Scholarly communication0.0090.008
Open science0.0060.008
Research integrity0.0090.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0600.012

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 head0.276
GPT teacher head0.644
Teacher spread0.368 · 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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ OpenSame topicSchool Health and Nursing EducationFrench-language works237,207