MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6962674479 · doi:10.17605/osf.io/cnj24

The Role of the Nurse Navigator in Breast Cancer Care: Barriers and Recommendations for Implementation - A Scoping Review Protocol

2022· other· en· W6962674479 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueOSF Preprints (OSF Preprints) · 2022
Typeother
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlobal Cancer Incidence and Screening
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProtocol (science)Breast cancerHealth careResource (disambiguation)MEDLINEPractice nurse

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Navigating the healthcare system can be a daunting and confusing experience. Nurse navigators aim to provide cancer patients with guidance and emotional support throughout their entire journey, from screening to remission. Nurse navigator programs have been shown to increase patient satisfaction and to reduce inequalities in access to care. However, costs and resource availability may restrict implementation of this program. This scoping review aims to understand the benefits of nurse navigators, as well as the barriers to implementation. This review will outline the factors that make a successful nurse navigator program, evaluate barriers, and provide recommendations for implementing a coordinated care model with nurse navigators.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.124
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.138
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.124
Threshold uncertainty score0.654

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1240.138
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0100.014
Bibliometrics0.0220.019
Science and technology studies0.0050.004
Scholarly communication0.0080.009
Open science0.0060.009
Research integrity0.0080.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0350.006

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.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.396
Teacher spread0.372 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOSF Preprints (OSF Preprints)→Same topicGlobal Cancer Incidence and Screening→French-language works237,207→