Nurse Practitioners: A Call for Implimentation in Manitoba
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nurse practitioners (NPs) are an underutilized resource in Manitoba.The purpose of this literature review was to provide an overview of the current situation of nurse practitioners in Manitoba, and to provide research-based recommendations for the implementation of nurse practitioners in Manitoba.The recommendations are: 1.The current regulating body of Registered Nurses in Manitoba (College of Registered Nurses of Manitoba, or CRNM) must recognize nurse practitioners as expert nurses, in following Benner's (1984) stages of nursing practice.This recognition would require a graduate degree as an entry-level educational requirement.2. NP licensure must be required in order to provide a standardized professional designation to the public and to provide a means for regulation and disciplinary action (Bennett, 2001) .3. Lastly, legislation must be enacted that allows nurse practitioners to have an autonomous practice within a defined scope of practice, in line with their graduate education (Hall, 2000) .4 Nurse Practitioners Implementation of these research-based recommendations would allow Manitoba residents to have greater access to effective, cost-efficient primary care.
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 | 0.009 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 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".