MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4313309320 · doi:10.25071/2291-5796.137

Health Inequities and Moral Distress Among Community Health Nurses During the COVID-19 Pandemic

2022· article· en· W4313309320 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Catherine Baxter, Ruth Schofield, Claire Betker, Genevieve Currie, Françoise Filion, Patti Gauley, May Lin Tao, Mary-Ann Taylor

Bibliographic record

VenueWitness The Canadian Journal of Critical Nursing Discourse · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicEthics in medical practice
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMount Royal UniversityMcMaster UniversityVancouver Coastal HealthToronto Public HealthBrandon University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPandemicHealth equityPsychological interventionEquity (law)Social determinants of healthPsychologyCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Health promotionDistressMedicineNursingPublic healthPolitical sciencePsychiatryClinical psychologyDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The core values of community health nursing practice are rooted in the social determinants of health, health equity and social justice. Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, community health nurses (CHNs) witnessed first-hand the impact on individuals in situations of marginalization. This research inquiry explored how health inequities among client populations contributed to experiences of MD among CHNs in Canada during the pandemic. A total of 245 CHNs from across Canada participated in an online survey. Participants reported that during the pandemic individuals living in situations of marginalization were disproportionately impacted. CHNs were unable to provide the necessary health promotion interventions and experienced high levels of moral distress. The negative impact of the pandemic on individuals living in situations of marginalization illuminated the intersecting social and structural inequities that drive negative health outcomes and emphasized the need to adopt an equity focus for current and future pandemic planning, response, and recovery.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.029
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 score0.959
Threshold uncertainty score0.872

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.029
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0260.020
Scholarly communication0.0080.004
Open science0.0020.011
Research integrity0.0020.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.144
GPT teacher head0.516
Teacher spread0.372 · 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

Citations12
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWitness The Canadian Journal of Critical Nursing DiscourseSame topicEthics in medical practiceFrench-language works237,207