MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4221042021 · doi:10.12927/cjnl.2022.26750

Optimizing the Nursing Role in Abortion Care: Considerations for Health Equity

2022· article· en· W4221042021 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Andrea Carson, Martha Paynter, Wendy V. Norman, Sarah Munro, Josette Roussel, Sheila Dunn, Denise Bryant‐Lukosius, Stephanie Begun, Ruth Martin‐Misener

Bibliographic record

VenueNursing leadership · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicReproductive Health and Contraception
Canadian institutionsMontfort HospitalMcMaster UniversityWomen's College HospitalUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of TorontoDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNursingAbortionEquity (law)Health carePsychologyMedicinePolitical sciencePregnancy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Registered nurses (RNs) provide abortion care in hospitals and clinics and support abortion care through sexual health education and family planning care in sexual health clinics, schools and family practice. Nurse practitioners (NPs) improve access to abortion not only as prescribers of medication abortion but also as primary care providers of counselling, resources about pregnancy options and abortion follow-up care in their communities. There is a need to better understand the current status of and potential scope for optimizing nursing roles in abortion care across Canada. In this article, we describe the leadership of nurses in the provision of accessible, inclusive abortion services and discuss barriers to role optimization. We present key insights from a priority-setting meeting held in 2019 with NPs and RNs engaged in medication abortion practice in their communities. As scopes of practice continue to evolve, optimization of nursing roles in abortion care is an approach to enhancing equitable access to comprehensive abortion care and family planning.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.876
Threshold uncertainty score0.721

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.265
GPT teacher head0.415
Teacher spread0.149 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations7
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNursing leadershipSame topicReproductive Health and ContraceptionFrench-language works237,207