Creating spaces for care for nurses working in the pandemic in light of the nursing process
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To make a dialog about the nursing professionals' perception regarding how they cope with COVID-19 and the repercussions on their practice and personal life. METHODS: This is a qualitative study, typified as participatory action research, which was carried out using Paulo Freire's Research Itinerary linked to the steps of the Nursing Process. To that end, the following guiding question was launched: How is it for you to act as a nursing professional in the hospital area during the COVID-19 pandemic? RESULTS: Three syntheses emerged, which guided the discussion: The challenges of being a nursing professional in the pandemic. The learning and growth that the challenges of the pandemic have generated and Nursing as the protagonist of care. The Virtual Culture Circle was a space where, despite the limitations, provided a social interaction among the participants, with mutual exchange of experiences, with many reflections, besides expressions of feelings, experiences and learning obtained during the COVID-19 pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: The nurses perceived that, although this moment highlights and appreciates the profession, nursing is overloaded and exhausted by the COVID-19 pandemic, with repercussions on professional and personal life. The care for those who care needs to be planned and implemented in different scenarios, and the Nursing Process built based on theoretical and scientific knowledge guide the effective improvement of the quality of health care.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it