MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406388527 · doi:10.2196/66109

Teaching in the Digital Age—Developing a Support Program for Nursing Education Providers: Design-Based Research

2025· article· en· W4406388527 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

VenueJMIR Formative Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHealth Education and Validation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersBundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung
KeywordsNursingNurse educationMedical educationComputer scienceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Health care systems and the nursing profession worldwide are being transformed by technology and digitalization. Nurses acquire digital competence through their own experience in daily practice, but also from education and training; nursing education providers thus play an important role. While nursing education providers have some level of digital competence, there is a need for ongoing training and support for them to develop more advanced skills and effectively integrate technology into their teaching. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to develop a needs-based support program for nursing education providers to foster digital competencies and to test this intervention. METHODS: We used a design-based research approach, incorporating iterative development with expert consultation to create and evaluate a support program for nursing education providers. Focus groups were conducted online to assess needs, and thematic content analysis was used to derive key insights. The support program was then refined through expert feedback and subjected to a feasibility and satisfaction test, with participant evaluations analyzed descriptively. RESULTS: Six main categories emerged from the focus groups, highlighting key areas, including the use of digital technology, ongoing support needs, and the current state of digitalization in nursing education. The support program was developed based on these findings, with expert validation leading to adjustments in timing, content prioritization, and platform integration. Preliminary testing showed good overall satisfaction with the support program, although participants suggested improvements in content relevance and digital platform usability. CONCLUSIONS: Although the feasibility test showed high satisfaction with the support program, low participation rates and limited perceived knowledge gain were major concerns. The results suggest that while the program was well received, further refinements, including a focus on competency-based approaches and addressing workplace barriers, are needed to increase participation and effectiveness of such interventions. The findings of this research can be used as a basis for the development of similar programs in other educational and health care contexts.

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)0.022
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.880
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0220.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.477
GPT teacher head0.654
Teacher spread0.177 · 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