L’infermiere come agente morale della professione, la sensibilita etica e i valori professionali
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this thesis is aimed to answer to the question: nurse's ethical sensitivity today is consistent with the definition of nurse as moral agent of the profession? In order to answer, nurses will be defined as moral agent of the profession through the revision of most representive ethical currents in bioethics (Principialism, ethics of virtues, ethics of natural law and ethics of respect for people) motivating so his ethical/deontological involvement within the intellectual professions and the health system; we will proceed to identify which values underlie the profession and form the foundation for the professional moral agent, starting from those explained in the UN declaration in 1948 and researching them in the most representative codes of ethics, Italy, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, International Council of Nurses. The concepts that define the professionals, caring, advocacy, accountability and cooperation, will be a useful basis, together with the compassion defined as a qualifying component, to help to define the moral agent. Then the Nurses Professional Values Scale-R (NPVS) questionnaire, of the American colleagues Darlene Weis and Mary Jane Schank, will be administered to a representative sample of professionals in order to identify the ethical sensitivity of the same today; in the conclusions will be compared the data collected through the questionnaire with the definition of nurse as moral agent of the profession.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 it