MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385416707 · doi:10.25071/2291-5796.151

Vers des stratégies de plaidoyer structurel : une étude sur le processus de plaidoyer chez les infirmières en santé communautaire

2023· article· en· W4385416707 on OpenAlex
Geneviève McCready, Hélène Laperrière

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueWitness The Canadian Journal of Critical Nursing Discourse · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicNursing Education, Practice, and Leadership
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaUniversité du Québec à Rimouski
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In order to reduce social inequities in health, nurses need to move from patient advocacy to policy advocacy. Literature reports many barriers when nurses try to address the structural level of policy advocacy. Very little empirical research exists to show how nurses respond to these barriers and the resulting impact on the effectiveness of policy advocacy. This study characterized the types and the process of advocacy practiced by community health nurses. A collaborative ethnography with 21 nurses showed that their policy advocacy was often dismissed, leading to negative consequences such as less policy advocacy attempts, changes in their clinical evaluation with patients and personal experiences of moral distress. We argue that structural change will only occur when collective advocacy will be supported by organizations, therefore reducing inequities that affect both community health and working conditions of nurses. Afin de réduire les iniquités sociales de santé, les infirmières doivent dépasser le plaidoyer axé sur les individus en investissant des stratégies de plaidoyer ciblant les structures et les politiques. Dans cet article, nous soutenons que de ne pas exercer de plaidoyer structurel peut amener des conséquences néfastes pour les infirmières elles-mêmes et les communautés qu’elles desservent. Cette étude caractérise les types et le processus de plaidoyer exercés par les infirmières en santé communautaire. Une ethnographie collaborative avec 21 infirmières montre que leurs tentatives de plaidoyer structurel étaient ignorées, décourageant les tentatives futures, entraînant des changements dans leur évaluation clinique et des expériences de détresse morale. Nous argumentons que le changement structurel surviendra seulement lorsque les stratégies de plaidoyer seront collectivisées et soutenues par les organisations de santé, réduisant ainsi les iniquités affectant à la fois la santé communautaire et les conditions de travail des infirmières.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.369
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.006
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.311 · 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