MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4315748408 · doi:10.2196/44101

A Technology-Supported Guidance Model to Increase the Flexibility, Quality, and Efficiency of Nursing Education in Clinical Practice in Norway: Development Study of the TOPP-N Application Prototype

2023· article· en· W4315748408 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Andréa Aparecida Gonçalves Nes, Jaroslav Zlámal, Silje Christin Wang Linnerud, Simen A. Steindal, Marianne Trygg Solberg

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Human Factors · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSimulation-Based Education in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversitetet i AgderLovisenberg Diakonale Høgskole
KeywordsNursingNurse educationCompetence (human resources)Flexibility (engineering)Quality (philosophy)MedicineMedical educationPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The challenges of nursing shortage in the nursing profession and of limited nursing educational capacity in nursing education in clinical practice need to be addressed to ensure supply according to the demand of these professionals. In addition, communication problems among nursing students, nurse educators, and nurse preceptors; variations in the guidance competence of nurse preceptors; and limited overview from nurse educators on nursing students' clinical practice are common challenges reported in several research studies. These challenges affect the quality of nursing education in clinical practice, and even though these problems have been highlighted for several years, a recent study showed that these problems are increasing. Thus, an approach is required to ensure the quality of nursing education in clinical practice. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to develop a guidance and assessment application to meet the challenges reported in clinical practice. The application intended to increase the flexibility, quality, and efficiency of nursing education in clinical practice. Furthermore, it intended to increase interactive communication that supports guidance and ensure structured evaluation of nursing students in clinical practice. METHODS: This study employed a multidisciplinary user-participatory design. Overall, 23 stakeholders from the project team (ie, 5 researchers, 2 software developers, 1 pedagogical advisor, and 15 user representatives [4 educators, 6 preceptors, and 5 students]) participated in a user-centered development process that included workshops, intervention content development, and prototype testing. RESULTS: This study resulted in the creation of the Technology-Optimized Practice Process in Nursing (TOPP-N) guidance and assessment application for use as a supportive tool for nursing students, nurse preceptors, and nurse educators in clinical practice. The development process included the application's name and logo, technical architecture, guidance and assessment module, and security and privacy. CONCLUSIONS: This study offers insights into the development of an evidence-based technological tool to support nursing students, nurse preceptors, and nurse educators in clinical practice. Furthermore, the developed application has the potential to meet several challenges reported in nursing education in clinical practice. After a rigorous development process, we believe that the TOPP-N guidance and assessment application prototype is now ready to be tested in further intervention studies.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.295

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.172
GPT teacher head0.545
Teacher spread0.373 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations23
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Human FactorsSame topicSimulation-Based Education in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207