MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4296806568 · doi:10.1111/nup.12406

Reflections on the nursing theory movement

2022· article· en· W4296806568 on OpenAlexaff
Sally Thorne

Bibliographic record

VenueNursing Philosophy · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicEthics in medical practice
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConversationSociologyNursing theoryNurse educationNursingMovement (music)Nursing researchPhilosophical methodologyEngineering ethicsEpistemologyMEDLINEMedicinePhilosophyAestheticsPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This manuscript represents one segment of a philosophical conversation held in a virtual webinar in February 2021 to consider some of the current debates in nursing theory, education and practice, and their relationship to philosophy. The webinar was sponsored by the International Philosophy of Nursing Society and the Centre for Nursing Philosophy at University of California, Irvine as an opportunity provide a venue for important philosophical and theoretical thinking to a wide audience of nurse educators and practitioners around the world.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.917
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0110.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.265
GPT teacher head0.555
Teacher spread0.291 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations10
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNursing PhilosophySame topicEthics in medical practiceFrench-language works237,207