Familiarity in Rural Life: Protocol for a Scoping Review and Concept Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Familiarity is a concept often used in literature but is not well defined or understood. As a key concept in rural nursing theory, the conceptual understanding of familiarity is currently incomplete. The findings from this scoping review will inform a concept analysis using Walker and Avant's method and to identify and define the missing key components of familiarity. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this scoping review is to examine and analyze what is known in the existing literature about the concept of familiarity. METHODS: The Joanna Briggs Institute scoping review framework guided the identification of literature published from 2016 to 2022 on familiarity. Following the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) reporting standard, the familiarity scoping review is registered on Open Science Framework (registration digital object identifier: 10.17605/OSF.IO/ZB8VF). A total of 8 databases, including PubMed, CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature) Plus with full text, APA PsychInfo, Communication Source, EBSCO MegaFILE, Medline, Nursing & Allied Health Database, and ScienceDirect, will be searched for 22 search terms. Covidence software will be used to manage the scoping review with each citation independently reviewed by 2 research team members for eligibility. Eligibility will be determined using a 2-level process. Each title and abstract will be screened for eligibility; for citations deemed eligible, a full-text article review will be conducted. The scoping review is expected to locate a large body of literature, and eligibility criteria will be refined during the title and abstract screening process. In addition, reference list scanning will be performed to locate relevant literature. RESULTS: Familiarity data will be collected beginning October 2021 with anticipated completion in March 2022. Dissemination of findings will occur through scholarly presentations and in rural-focused and nursing publications in 2022 or 2023. The findings from this review will further the understanding of familiarity and how it affects rural life and nursing practice. CONCLUSIONS: This review will support a full understanding and add clarity to the concept of familiarity as a component of rural life. These new insights will advance the understanding of how familiarity influences rural health care practice. The concept analysis will provide theoretical support for rural nursing theory and promote an understanding of the interrelationships of rural concepts. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): PRR1-10.2196/36930.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.142 | 0.137 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.012 | 0.014 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.016 | 0.013 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.010 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.123 | 0.024 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".