MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402437609 · doi:10.1016/j.nepr.2024.104134

Redressing discrimination in Canadian nursing programs: Student perspectives

2024· article· en· W4402437609 on OpenAlexaffabout
Ingrid Handlovsky, Allie Slemon, Shivinder Dhari

Bibliographic record

VenueNurse Education in Practice · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCultural Competency in Health Care
Canadian institutionsCamosun CollegeUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNursingPsychologyMedicineMedical education

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIM /OBJECTIVE: To identify strategies nursing students recommend for responding to discrimination in their program. BACKGROUND: The nursing discipline is rooted in social justice, which is increasingly positioned as practices that seek to enhance equity in health and healthcare. Yet, a growing body of knowledge indicates nursing students experience discrimination by virtue of race, sexual identity, gender identity, ability and mental health in nursing programs. There is a dearth of information that speaks to redressing discrimination in nursing schools, particularly from the perspectives of nursing students. DESIGN: This study reports on the findings of the qualitative portion of a mixed-methods project. METHODS: Data were collected via qualitative interviews (n=20) conducted on the Zoom platform. Inclusion criteria included any nursing graduate or undergraduate student enrolled in two institutions in Western Canada. Analysis was guided by a combination of thematic analysis with interpretive description to facilitate the identification of broader themes within the context of relevant disciplinary considerations. RESULTS: Three key themes that represent nursing student perspectives to redress discrimination in their programs were identified: (1) strategies to redress discrimination at the level of the educator/curriculum, (2) strategies to redress discrimination at the structural level and, (3) strategies to support students who have experienced discrimination. CONCLUSIONS: Systematic curriculum updates and educator supports to ensure up-to date knowledge and appropriate educator approaches are needed in classroom and clinical settings. The integration of equity-seeking processes at higher levels, e.g. for example, nursing standards of practice, was identified as essential to redress discrimination in education as well in everyday nursing practice. Lastly, a clearly defined reporting pathway was suggested to support students who have been subject to discrimination. Given this is one of the first investigations into student perspectives on redressing discrimination in nursing schools, additional research is needed to evoke meaningful change.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.525
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.491
Teacher spread0.452 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNurse Education in PracticeSame topicCultural Competency in Health CareFrench-language works237,207