Striving for Health Equity Through Nursing Education: A Critical Examination of Non-traditional Community Health Placements
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Undergraduate nursing programs are increasingly using non-traditional community health placements within their curricula, though their impact on the organizations and clients they serve has not been widely explored. Therefore, this article aims to examine the use of non-traditional community health placements in undergraduate nursing programs using the political economy of health inequities as an analytical framework. We discuss the limits of non-traditional placements in addressing health inequities, suggesting our work contributes to the perception that something is being done to address the dual unregulated drug poisoning and housing crises while failing to tackle their root causes. We theorize that non-traditional health placements allow nursing programs to continue to graduate enough nurses to meet increasing workforce demands under prolonged austerity measures that have reduced funding to both post-secondary institutions and public health. Finally, we discuss strategies to mitigate harm and commit to more equitable partnerships. Keywords: political economy of health inequities, health equity, non-traditional placements, community health nursing, nursing education
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it