MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200038313 · doi:10.1891/cn-2021-0011

Nurses at the United Nations

2021· article· en· W4200038313 on OpenAlexaff
Teddie Potter, Elizabeth Schenk, Cara Cook

Bibliographic record

VenueCreative Nursing · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGlobal Health Workforce Issues
Canadian institutionsProvidence Health Care
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNursingMedicinePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is an urgent call to redesign health care to be more equitable, to address the climate change crisis, and to implement the United Nations' Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) for the health of the global community. Now is the time for nurses to get involved in leading these necessary changes. In 2019, the authors were chosen to present a concurrent session at the 68th United Nations Civil Society Conference. The conference focused on SDG 11, Building Inclusive and Sustainable Cities and Communities. The experience convinced the authors that nurses have unique knowledge and skills to contribute to the mission of the United Nations.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.153
Threshold uncertainty score0.511

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0070.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1530.069

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 head0.091
GPT teacher head0.501
Teacher spread0.410 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCreative NursingSame topicGlobal Health Workforce IssuesFrench-language works237,207