MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7009889164

Exploration du sentiment de compétence et d'autonomie professionnelle des infirmières cliniciennes avant et après l'implantation d'un outil de gestion intégrée de la santé chez les personnes atteintes de dystrophie myotonique de type I

2010· other· fr· W7009889164 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueLibrary and Archives Canada (Government of Canada) · 2010
Typeother
Languagefr
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstrophysical Phenomena and Observations
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOccupational trainingWest indiesManpower planning
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Devant la complexité de la dystrophie myotonique de type 1, les soins et les services devraient être coordonnés par un même intervenant. L'objectif visait à explorer le sentiment de compétence et l'autonomie professionnelle d'infirmières gestionnaires de cas avec l'implantation d'un outil de gestion intégrée de la santé (OGIS) à partir des domaines de compétence en sciences infirmières de Benner et de la théorie sociocognitive de Bandura. Lors d'entrevues qualitatives, les infirmières (n = 6) ont rapporté des obstacles et des défis reliés aux caractéristiques de la clientèle et aux ressources pour réaliser leur rôle. L'introduction de l'OGIS a amélioré le sentiment de compétence et l'autonomie professionnelle, surtout chez les débutantes. Ces dernières ont rapporté un positionnement et une reconnaissance de leur rôle ainsi qu'une meilleure connaissance de la situation de santé des personnes. L'OGIS semble efficace pour développer une pratique infirmière élargie spécialisée, sans compromettre l'individualisation des soins.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.189 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLibrary and Archives Canada (Government of Canada)→Same topicAstrophysical Phenomena and Observations→French-language works237,207→