MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7136252006 · doi:10.5737/2368807636166

Translating evidence into practice: Developing Canada’s first position statement on genomics-informed oncology nursing

2025· article· W7136252006 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Andrea Gretchev, Rebecca Puddester, Patrick Chiu, Lindsay Carlsson, Kathleen Leslie, Catriona Buick, April Pike, Jacqueline Limoges

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Oncology Nursing Journal · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBRCA gene mutations in cancer
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPosition statementWorkforcePosition paperPosition (finance)Oncology nursingHealth careStatement (logic)Nursing research

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The integration of genomics in oncology care is accelerating in Canada, presenting new opportunities for nurses to improve cancer outcomes through enhanced screening, diagnosis, and targeted therapies. However, nurses have identified that they require policy guidance to clarify their roles and responsibilities as members of interprofessional teams delivering genomic services. In response, the Canadian Nursing and Genomics Initiative, in collaboration with the Canadian Association of Nursing in Oncology/Association Canadienne des Infirmières et Infirmiers en Oncologie, and an interdisciplinary working group developed the first pan-Canadian position statement to guide genomics-informed oncology nursing practice. To support further engagement and use of the position statement, we outline the rationale for developing the position statement and the role of position statements in supporting nursing practice and innovation in genomics-informed oncology nursing. We describe the governance structure and co-design methodology that facilitated its collaborative interdisciplinary development, and how this approach is critical for nursing advocacy, integrated knowledge translation, and ongoing engagement. Finally, we offer recommendations for oncology nurses to translate the position statement into practice changes. This position statement is a preliminary step toward advancing genomics integration in cancer care and ensuring nursing practice remains at the forefront of innovation.

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: yes · About a Canadian topic: yes
Not applicablelow
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Commentary
About the Canadian research system: yes · About a Canadian topic: no
Not applicablemedium
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.185
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.261
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.220
Threshold uncertainty score0.977

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1850.261
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0070.005
Science and technology studies0.0200.014
Scholarly communication0.0270.009
Open science0.0080.018
Research integrity0.0240.022
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.380
Teacher spread0.354 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical · Commentary

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
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Oncology Nursing JournalSame topicBRCA gene mutations in cancerFrench-language works237,207