Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents the results of a literature search on the role of clinical practice for midwifery educators. University-based midwifery education in Canada has a short history, with Ontario first admitting students in 1993, Quebec in 1999 and British Columbia in 2002. Although the move to formal, accredited programs has increased the rigour and uniformity of education, it also poses challenges to learning. One such challenge is overcoming the theory- practice gap, a challenge shared by other health disciplines. Studies from the United States, Australia, New Zealand and the United Kingdom suggest that college and university-based midwifery and nurse educators are isolated from clinical practice and decision-making. Most lecturers surveyed in these studies viewed clinical teaching as fulfilling a requirement for clinical practice. Few were actually in clinical practice. This precipitated the perception by staff and clinical managers that midwifery and nursing educators were not clinically credible. Studies uniformly conclude that organizational structures must be created to support the practice role of health professions' educators within the educator's academic and practice positions. The concerns identified in the international literature inform issues currently faced by midwifery education programs in Canada.
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 | 0.015 | 0.145 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".