MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4394720112 · doi:10.5430/jnep.v14n7p22

Evaluation of nutritional literacy among undergraduate nursing students

2024· article· en· W4394720112 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
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

VenueJournal of Nursing Education and Practice · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHealth Education and Validation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNursingLiteracyPsychologyMedical educationMedicinePedagogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background/Objective: It is difficult to describe or quantify the extensiveness and importance of the nurses’ role in direct patient care. Although Registered Dietitian Nutritionists (RDN) are available, it is often the nurse who is tasked with monitoring a patient’s nutritional status and carrying out nutrition interventions to optimize oral intake such as providing meals and oral supplements, as well as administering enteral and parenteral nutrition. Therefore, it is critical that nurses have an understanding of nutrition to promote good health. Although fundamental nursing courses stress the nurse’s role in promoting healthy nutrition as a means to prevent disease and assist patients in sustaining wellness, there is no standardized nursing curriculum enforcing an independent nutrition course within nursing programs.Methods: A quantitative methodology was used to explore the level of nutritional awareness as measured by the Nutritional Literacy Assessment Instrument (NLit) among BSN nursing students in a public, 4-year institution in the Mid-West of the United States. Nutritional literacy, as defined by Gibbs et al., students’ knowledge of food and associated impact on nutrition was evaluated. Results: The data indicated that 70% of participants had completed an undergraduate nutrition course, with the highest performance on the Nutritional Literacy Survey within the understanding of food groups. Over 80% of respondents were found to have a likelihood of good nutrition literacy. Although no statistical significance was found between a pre-requisite Nutrition course and/or an integrated Nursing Nutrition course and Nutritional Literacy, statistical significance was found when examining student classification (sophomores versus seniors) impact on Nutritional Literacy scores.Conclusions: Promoting the integration of nutrition concepts across a variety of courses within the nursing curriculum will assist the student to utilize clinical judgment in the application and synthesis of nutritional concepts in relation to patient health and wellness.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.806
Threshold uncertainty score0.630

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
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 head0.261
GPT teacher head0.620
Teacher spread0.359 · 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