MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387196293 · doi:10.29393/ce29-15itgi60015

IMPLEMENTACIÓN DE TRES GUÍAS DE BUENAS PRÁCTICAS CLÍNICAS EN LA ESCUELA DE ENFERMERÍA DE LA UNIVERSIDAD DE TALCA, CHILE

2023· article· es· W4387196293 on OpenAlex

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCiencia y enfermería/Ciencia y enfermería · 2023
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth and Medical Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesMedicinePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

El presente artículo describe el proceso de implementación de tres guías elaboradas por la Registered Nurses’ Association of Ontario (RNAO) de Canadá, en el módulo enfermería en el adulto en la Escuela de Enfermería de la Universidad de Talca, proceso que se enmarca en el convenio establecido entre la Universidad de Talca y esta asociación, a través del Departamento de Enfermería de la Universidad de Chile, host leader del ProgramaBasada en Evidencia en la práctica clínica y también, establecer una alianza entre la institución académica y los centros de asistencia sanitaria de Guías de Buenas Prácticas Clínicas de la RNAO. Esta implementación se llevó a cabo a través de diversas metodologías de enseñanza-aprendizaje que han permitido a los estudiantes integrar y aplicar la Enfermería

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)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.216
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.482
Teacher spread0.449 · 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