Le rôle infirmier auprès de personnes aînées en milieux d’hébergement depuis la pandémie de COVID-19 : protocole d’une revue de la portée
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: The nursing role in elderly care has received increased attention during the COVID-19 pandemic. It is therefore essential to better understand the enactment of the nursing practice through professional activities carried out in long-term care facilities since the pandemic. Objective: To identify and synthesize the activities performed by nurses caring for elderly persons in long-term care facilities since the COVID-19 pandemic through a scoping review of literature from 2020-2023. A framework combining the Nursing Role Effectiveness Model by Irvine et al. (1998) and the Cadre de référence sur l’exercice infirmier auprès des personnes hébergées en centre d’hébergement et de soins de longue durée from the Ordre des infirmières et infirmiers du Québec (2018) will allow for the identification of independent, dependent and interdependent nursing activities in these settings. Method: The review will follow the scoping review method of the Joanna Briggs Institute (Peters et al., 2020). We will query CINAHL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PsycINFO databases to identify empirical studies published in English and French from 2020 to 2023. The selection of relevant studies will be carried out independently by 2 reviewers. Data on nursing activities will be extracted, categorized, and analyzed in line with the scoping review framework. Discussion and Research Spin-offs: This research will identify nursing activities since the COVID-19 pandemic through recent studies that have addressed this topic in the context of long-term care facilities. Recommendations will be made concerning activities that are infrequently or not at all carried out by nurses, as well as factors that influence these activities.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.119 | 0.126 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.014 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.012 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.035 | 0.006 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".