The Theory of Neo correction Nursing by Chun Jung-hwan emeritus Professor
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Correctional medicine, which has been influenced by the Western philosophy of empirical dualism, has been dominated by biomedical medical models. In the history of correctional nursing, the American Nursing Association recognized the expertise of correctional nursing in 1975 and a holistic medical model reflecting the ideology of the 1986 WHO Ottawa Charter has been declared that reflects the social and psychological needs of the prisoners, deviating from the biomedical medical model in the UN's principle of treatment of prisoners in 1990. In Korea, there are six studies on correctional nursing from 1945 to November 2024, although many studies have been conducted in developed countries as well as in developing countries.Due to the lack of history of correctional nursing, academic identity has not been established clearly. Due to the limitations of domestic and foreign previous studies, there is a limit to the lack of identity and representation in the concept, and the narrowness of ideology overlooks various corrective nursing ideologies and third, even though it is applied science, there is no basic theory of integrated model of correctional nursing. The content of the previous study is limited because the researchers lack an interdisciplinary perspective. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to criticize the problems of previous studies and to create a new theory of correctional nursing through the concept, ideology and theoretical model of new correctional nursing and this study proposes a psychosocial welfare theory that reflects the context of value-oriented welfare ideology, breaking away from the value-neutral, administrative and technical correctional nursing theory. At the same time, various new concepts such as medical welfare resocialization were newly created. Medical welfare resocialization is correctional artistic nursing as a basis for rehabilitation through the recovery process by cultural,artistic caring considering the individual story of the prisoner, and furthermore, to be recreated as new self by realizing community citizenship. It is only possible for nurses and unfriendly to doctors. This is because the unconditional caring medical care of nurses, which is based on welfare compassion and humanistic sophisticated art, is completely different from the professional medical practice of doctors whose essence is only formal technology. The holistic recovery of a patient crouched in a cold prison cell is possible only with the artistic medical care of a nurse based on the warm affection in one's heart that can melt the cold prison cell as well as the physician's mechanical professional medical practice .As a result, it can be an opportunity for re-socialization of prisoners. In this respect, medical welfare resocialization by nurses should be illuminated. Nurses are the actors of medical resocialization in that caregiving medical care is the primary purpose, but the resocialization and the development of scientific correction techniques are legally obligatory by the correctional laws. Medical resocialization by nurses is different from intentional, purposive, authoritative, and involuntary bureaucratic resocialization by guards in that it is a non-manifestive, potential, unintentional, contextual intention, and resulting personality. Since the practice of medical welfare and the practice of correctional welfare are involved in the practice of “medical resocialization”, it was first theorized as the ideology of correctional nursing in the sense of “medical welfare (nursing welfare) resocialization”. Nursing and correction theroy are applied sciences and social welfare approaches are essential, but previous studies on correction nursing study have not taken a corrective nursing welfare approach at all.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".