MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6991755739

Indirect Pathways Into Practice: A Comparative Examination of Indian and Philippine Internationally Educated Nurses and Their Entry Into Ontarioâs Nursing Profession

2012· article· en· W6991755739 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueScholars Commons (Wilfrid Laurier University) · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGlobal Health Workforce Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPresentation (obstetrics)Career PathwaysSettlement (finance)Government (linguistics)Nurse education
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Canada half of all internationally educated nurses (IENs) are employed in Ontario, and in 2010 the top three countries where new IENs had received their training were the Philippines, India and China. This presentation reports on preliminary results from an ongoing research project examining the experiences of IENs from the Philippines and India who intend to enter Ontario’s nursing profession indirectly via temporary migration streams. The preliminary survey results will be presented, including differences in the characteristics and experiences of the two groups as they follow migration and occupational pathways to enter Canada and the nursing profession in Ontario. The preliminary findings will highlight some of the issues the data reveal in terms of specific settlement experiences, issues of effective conversion of pre-migration training into professional practice post-migration, and how policy shifts toward temporary and two-step migration may be shaping the nature of IENs’ indirect pathways into practice.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.292
Threshold uncertainty score0.587

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0110.007
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0010.008
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.328 · 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 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
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScholars Commons (Wilfrid Laurier University)→Same topicGlobal Health Workforce Issues→French-language works237,207→