Engaging nursing students in a <scp>COVID</scp>‐19 <scp>Point‐of‐Care</scp> rapid screening clinic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has globally impacted nursing education, particularly clinical learning opportunities for undergraduate nursing students. PURPOSE: In this paper, we report on an educational activity wherein students participated in a COVID-19 Rapid Antigen Testing (RAT) clinic on a Canadian university campus. METHODS: Between February-April 2021, in the second term of a five-term accelerated program, nursing students (n = 60) participated in a nurse-led COVID-19 RAT clinic for students and staff living or working in congregate housing. Students participated in education activities which exposed nursing students to the full range of community health nursing roles in a pandemic. RESULTS: From clinical, research, policy, and public health, this educational activity acted as a microcosm of the critical roles that nurses employ in the health ecosystem. CONCLUSION: We offer lessons learned about implementing this activity, and how these lessons can be applied to routine and exceptional nursing curriculum.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".