Bibliographic record
Abstract
Why is the title Caring Sciences, in plural? The members of the Nordic College of Caring Sciences, who established the journal discussed this in great detail. The consensus was that we might be able to agree on the phenomenon of caring, however, the scientific approach or the scientific methods were not developed and could not be just a particular one. In 1999, The Nordic College of Caring Sciences stated the mission of the journal as ‘to contribute to the development and advancement of scientific knowledge related to health, wellbeing, caring and the alleviation of human suffering’. The emphasis is on research with a focus on the person, family and community (humans and their interactions with the society). In this mission the journal does not adhere to any given science theory and therefore ‘sciences’ is in the plural form. Further, the journal adheres to caring as a multiprofessional interest. The reader may notice that shared authorship often means that authors have different professional backgrounds and may come from different countries. The authors represent various research milieux and various professions. Over the last three decades, institutes for health and research and university education in nursing and other health allied subjects have emerged in Europe including in the Nordic countries. A few schools of thoughts have been vital, for example, Institute for Caring Science, Åbo Academi in Finland which recently celebrated its 15th anniversary. With the head of the Institute for Caring Science, Åbo Academi, Professor Katie Ericsson, they have developed a humanistic ontology – a theory on caring as a caritas phenomenon for alleviation of suffering. The science takes a phenomenological hermeneutic approach. Åbo Academi has welcomed doctoral students from other Nordic countries and also formed a postdoctoral group. Åbo Academy is just one of the institutes for caring sciences in Finland, but it is the institute where a particular school of thought has developed. In other institutes caring is a focus, but theory has not been developed into a school of thought and the scientific approach is open. In another Nordic research milieu, lead by professor Astrid Norberg at Umeå University, the focus is on ethics, in particular, ethics in caring for demented people at the end of their lives. In Umeå University, a particular approach to interpretation of narratives and observations was developed, inspired by the philosopher Poul Ricoeur. In Iceland, Denmark and Norway the caring sciences have developed embedded in nursing theories. The researchers have studied abroad and were inspired from various research milieux and schools of thoughts. This issue reflects the pluralism in caring sciences. For example, there are papers on validation of very different instruments. From Finland there is a paper on validation of an instrument where parents at home measure children's pain postoperative after a minor day surgery. This instrument was developed in Canada. Other instrument testing can be found in two papers from the Netherlands written in collaboration with professor Theo Dassen of Humbolt University, Germany. The tested instruments, a nursing minimum data set and a care-dependency scale on geriatric wards, are for use in direct care. A paper from the United Kingdom has focused on the interprofessional collaboration in health care in the situation of discharging a patient and the transferring of the patient to another care institution. It was found that delays in transfer might be the result of organizational rather than professional factors. In a study from Iceland, on health promotion in the workplace, the researchers emphasize that human relations at work, rather than individual health behaviour away from the work setting may impact on the workers' health. From Bergen in Norway there is a study on blood donors' understanding of the questions they are asked before donating blood. The lack of understanding of the questions prompted the researchers to call for concern on the quality of donated blood. In addition, I would like to mention one paper on breast cancer patients' experiences of lymphoedema. Lymphoedema is a well-known complication and after treatment for breast cancer the interaction skills of health care professionals may be of importance in strengthening the resources of the patient leading to a positive outcome in quality of life. The variety in these studies illustrates that caring sciences have many aspects. In universities, caring sciences as a subject is usually placed with medical science. In some universities the medical science is modernized to health sciences, but the traditions and beliefs governing medical science cannot be expected to change overnight in spite of being more openminded. The new sciences being part of health sciences may themselves be uncertain on their focus and only slowly formulate and develop their ontology. Caring sciences in the Nordic countries have taken some steps. One can then ask what is the common denominator? Can the various perspectives come together? Or can the variety be a necessity for the steps towards the science for better care! In this journal the focus should be on the aim and scope. Caring has traditionally been taken for granted as a universal phenomenon. However, in the modern society, for example, in institutions, caring professionals have fragmented relationships with many people. The people who used to be called patients are in institutions today viewed as consumers. They can sometimes experience a fragmentation in relationships where the situation can be anything but caring. The recipients of care may feel neglected or feel being treated as objects. Health as a result of well-being and well-being enhanced in human relationships is a common denominator for some of the papers in this journal. This emphasizes the impact professional caregivers can make in their human relations. The Nordic College of Caring Sciences' conference, held in March 2002, had the theme ‘Meeting’. The conference highlighted the impact of human relations on health. The papers presented were as different as the papers published in this journal. In March 2003, the Nordic College of Caring Sciences will hold a conference in Iceland with the theme ‘Dialoguing About Caring Sciences in the Nordic Countries – The Perspective of the Patient/Client in Various Clinical Contexts’. This symposium will further elaborate on Caring Sciences. The symposium will be held in English and proceedings will be produced. Participation in the symposium is open to members and non-members of the Nordic College of Caring Sciences and to International scientists interested in the theme. Further details on the symposium in Iceland can be obtained at (http://www.nccs.nu/konferencer/aktuell) or at (ajnyysti@hi.is). Caring Sciences will continue to develop, and this journal is a link between the scientists interested in caring.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".