Exploring conceptual and theoretical frameworks for Nurse Practitioner Education
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The use of conceptual and theoretical frameworks to organize graduate level curriculum in the preparation of Nurse Practitioners (NPs) is necessary to preserve nursing focus. There is a tendency to conceptualize the learning in these programs as related to skills-based tasks and competencies alone. An assessment of available conceptual/theoretical frameworks relevant to curriculum organization and delivery was required. Objective: The specific review question was: What conceptual and/or theoretical frameworks are available that are relevant to the structuring of NP education? Methods: The following databases and search engines were included: CINAHL, MEDLINE, ERIC, Embase, PsycINFO, Web of Science, Education Source and Google Scholar. The search for unpublished works was conducted in Dissertation Abstracts, Google Scholar and Embase Conference Proceedings. Documents meeting inclusion criteria were examined for relevance using the Ontario NP curriculum document. Data were extracted using a form developed for this purpose and organized into categories. Results: 2517 citations were located. Ten papers and two jurisdictional documents were ultimately included. Many of the documents purporting to describe frameworks were actually lists of competencies or course and were not in accord with our conceptual definition. The largest number of documents was categorized as describing andragogical frameworks (n = 6). Discussion: The important distinction between competency lists and true frameworks is the nature of lists to be variable/factor relationships, not conceptual relationships. It has been suggested that conceptual frameworks provide understanding rather than explanations and are open to reconceptualization that is appropriate a phenomenon's evolution. Conclusion: A capability-related framework can be used for curricular organization, design and delivery that fosters experiential learning, co-learning with educators, and acknowledges that entry to practice is more than competency. This approach is more than simply learning knowledge and skills and encourages problem solving while recognizing the contextual nature of health and the unpredictable and changing environments in which care is provided.
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 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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".