MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4383110035 · doi:10.32598/jnrcp.23.33

The central role of practice in nursing research: Beyond the modern versus postmodern discourse

2023· article· en· W4383110035 on OpenAlexaff
Joseph C. Osuji, Samad Karkhah

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Nursing Reports in Clinical Practice · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth Sciences Research and Education
Canadian institutionsMount Royal University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsObjectivismPositivismPostmodernismEpistemologySociologyModernism (music)Sociology of scientific knowledgeSocial sciencePhilosophyEngineering ethicsAesthetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nursing is a practice-based profession with a unique science and body of knowledge that comprises “paradigms, frameworks, and theories” [1]. Over the centuries, the objective (modernism) way of knowing, informed by positivist philosophy and quantitative research method, has defined traditional sciences. According to Allmark (2003), objectivism views scientific knowledge as being gained solely through objective observation, measuring, and quantifying, with a view of predicting and generalizing [2].

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)0.049
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.033
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
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 score0.991
Threshold uncertainty score0.257

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0490.033
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0090.154
Scholarly communication0.0270.039
Open science0.0030.014
Research integrity0.0140.014
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.394
GPT teacher head0.689
Teacher spread0.295 · 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.

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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Nursing Reports in Clinical PracticeSame topicHealth Sciences Research and EducationFrench-language works237,207