MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3199733537 · doi:10.5430/jnep.v12n1p56

Incorporating lead education content into undergraduate nursing curriculum: Impact on knowledge and confidence

2021· article· en· W3199733537 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Tsu‐Yin Wu, Lydia McBurrows, Jenni L. Hoffman, Sarah Lally, Vedhika Raghunathan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Nursing Education and Practice · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHeavy Metal Exposure and Toxicity
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBachelorNursingCurriculumNurse educationTest (biology)MedicineLicensurePsychologySample (material)Public healthMedical educationPedagogyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background and objective: Lead poisoning is a major public health crisis in Michigan. The purpose of this study was to explore the impact of an education intervention on knowledge and confidence levels among nursing students enrolled in the pre-licensure Bachelor of Science in Nursing and Registered Nurse to Bachelor of Science in Nursing (RN2BSN) program.Methods: The study used a quantitative pre- and post-test design to assess the impact of lead health learning activities on knowledge and confidence among undergraduate nursing students in the Midwestern United States. The final study sample included 115 nursing students from two student cohorts. The study instrument used 26-item Nursing Students Lead Knowledge and Confidence Scale; independent sample t-tests, paired sample t-test and Cohen’s d for the effect size were used in data analyses.Results: The education improved total knowledge and confidence on both groups whereas RN2BSN students had larger effect sizes on the differences of pre- to post-test scores than pre-licensure students in general lead knowledge, lead exposure knowledge, total lead knowledge, and confidence.Conclusions: The results contribute to limited literature examining a critical public health concern regarding lead health exposure and prevention education of nursing students. Incorporating such content area into nursing curriculums is essential in ensuring that such public health disparities are mitigated.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.069
GPT teacher head0.417
Teacher spread0.348 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Nursing Education and PracticeSame topicHeavy Metal Exposure and ToxicityFrench-language works237,207