MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Development of antimicrobial stewardship competencies: A pan-Canadian framework for nurses

2025· article· W7128056549 on OpenAlex

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Infection Control · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicAntibiotic Use and Resistance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAntimicrobial stewardshipFocus groupDelphi methodPsychological interventionCompetence (human resources)DelphiStewardship (theology)MEDLINE

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Recent evidence highlights the critical influence nurses may have in antimicrobial stewardship (AMS). However, nurses’ express knowledge gaps and a lack of confidence in leading AMS interventions. The AMS competencies framework was developed to address these challenges by providing a foundation for optimizing AMS-related nursing interventions with guidance and expected competencies that can be adapted to different practice settings and nursing categories. Methods: The framework development began with a literature review of nurses’ role in AMS across all nursing practice settings and was followed by a cross-Canada survey that involved 261 nurses, with 94% of respondents in non-prescribing roles and 6% in prescribing roles (nurse prescribers). Key survey findings were explored in virtual focus groups. Findings from the literature review, survey, and focus groups informed the initial draft of the AMS competency framework. The draft underwent internal review, and external validation through a Delphi Method with 33 reviewers and achieved high agreement (over 90%) on competency statements. Results: The AMS competency framework is organized within a matrix of seven AMS domains, nurses’ roles, and the competencies (knowledge, skills, attitudes) that nurses and nurse prescribers require to participate in AMS within their practice setting. The competencies are broadly divided into three types: Core, additional, and optional competencies. Additionally, an evaluation framework provides individual nurses and partners with potential guidance and approaches to measure outcomes associated with the achievement of the AMS competencies. Conclusion: Nurses’ impact on antimicrobial resistance (AMR) and involvement in AMS activities can have far-reaching benefits because nurses are at the forefront and interface across numerous care and practice settings. However, nurses’ engagement in AMS varies greatly and can be impacted by both individual factors (e.g., knowledge level, confidence, engagement) and contextual influences (e.g., workload, resources, leadership support, and advocacy to support nurses’ role in AMS). Coupled with contextual supports, the AMS competency framework represents an evidence-informed approach to define and support the knowledge, skills, and attitudes needed to maximize nurses’ role in AMS.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.754
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.237 · 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