MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3208367000 · doi:10.12927/cjnl.2021.26598

The Canadian Academy of Nursing: Why It Matters

2021· article· en· W3208367000 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Michael Villeneuve

Bibliographic record

VenueNursing leadership · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicNursing Roles and Practices
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaCanadian Nurses Association
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNursingAdministration (probate law)Nursing researchNurse AdministratorNurse educationPolitical scienceMEDLINEMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Canadian Academy of Nursing (the Academy) was established in 2019 to provide a focal point for nursing leadership in Canada that had been missing among the 40+ specialty practice and interest groups affiliated with the Canadian Nurses Association (CNA). More than 41,000 regulated nurses work in formal administration or management leadership roles, and many of them have shared a worrying array of self-identified gaps in leadership skills and development. This article presents an overview of programs being launched within the Academy to help address these gaps and describes other public policy priorities being addressed by the CNA.

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)0.032
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.095
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.970
Threshold uncertainty score0.695

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0320.095
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.007
Science and technology studies0.0300.023
Scholarly communication0.0220.011
Open science0.0040.009
Research integrity0.0120.021
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.005

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 head0.463
GPT teacher head0.477
Teacher spread0.014 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNursing leadershipSame topicNursing Roles and PracticesFrench-language works237,207