MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4286433197 · doi:10.1186/s12912-022-00977-0

Nursing students’ use of social media in their learning: a case study of a Canadian School of Nursing

2022· article· en· W4286433197 on OpenAlexaffabout
Catherine M. Giroux, Katherine Moreau

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Nursing · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Media in Health Education
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNursing researchSocial mediaNurse educationNursingNursing managementExploratory researchMedicinePsychologyPedagogySociologyComputer scienceSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Social media has diverse applications for nursing education. Current literature focuses on how nursing faculty use social media in their courses and teaching; less is known about how and why nursing students use social media in support of their learning. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to explore how nursing students use social media in their learning formally and informally. METHODS: This exploratory qualitative case study of a Canadian School of Nursing reports on the findings of interviews (n = 9) with nursing students to explore how they use social media in their learning. Data were analyzed using a combined deductive and inductive coding approach, using three cycles of coding to facilitate category identification. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: The findings demonstrate that participants use social media for formal and informal learning and specifically, as a third space to support their learning outside of formal institutional structures. Social media plays a role in the learning activities of nursing students studying both face-to-face and by distance. Accordingly, social media use has implications for learning theory and course design, particularly regarding creating space for student learning communities.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.077
Threshold uncertainty score0.522

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0460.009
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0040.006
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.281
GPT teacher head0.460
Teacher spread0.179 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations38
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC NursingSame topicSocial Media in Health EducationFrench-language works237,207