MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7007940581

Artificial intelligence in nursing education 1:strengths and weaknesses

2023· other· en· W7007940581 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Portal (King's College London) · 2023
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStrengths and weaknessesNurse educationNursing careMEDLINE
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Artificial intelligence (AI) refers to the application of algorithms and computational models that enable machines to exhibit cognitive abilities – including learning, reasoning, pattern recognition and language processing – that are similar to those of humans. By analysing vast amounts of data (text, images, audio and video), sophisticated digital tools, such as ChatGPT, have surpassed previous forms of AI and are now being used by students and educators in universities worldwide. Nurse educators could use these tools to support student learning, engagement and assessment. However, there are some drawbacks of which nurse educators and students should be aware, so they understand how to use AI tools appropriately in professional practice. This, the first of two articles on AI in nursing education, discusses the strengths and weaknesses of generative AI and gives recommendations for its use.

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)0.029
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.036
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: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.155

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0290.036
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.007
Scholarly communication0.0150.009
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0040.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.004

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.424
Teacher spread0.373 · 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
GenreCommentary

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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch Portal (King's College London)French-language works237,207