Exploring infection prevention and control education in Atlantic Canadian undergraduate nursing education programs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: To identify whether or not undergraduate nursing education curricula contain the material and delivery necessary to prepare nursing students to meet published core competencies for infection prevention and control (IP&C). Methods: Directors completed a curriculum review questionnaire to identify when and how IP&C material was covered in their programs. Online questionnaires were used to assess nurse educator and student knowledge and confidence. Results: Most programs provided at least some coverage of all topics identified in the published core competencies for IP&C, but the extent of coverage varied by topic. Educator and student total knowledge scores ranged from 61.5% - 86.5%, and 55.8% - 92.3% respectively, with variation found within topic areas. Educator and student total percent confidence scores ranged between 68.5% - 100.0% and 59.3% - 100.0% respectively, with variation also found within topic areas. Conclusion: Gaps in curricula were identified related to IP&C, as were gaps in educator and student knowledge and confidence. Strategies were identified to address these gaps.
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 | 0.005 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
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".