Interactive, Web-based Information Skills Tutorial Well Received by Graduate Students in Health and Social Care Research
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Objective – To determine whether a newly developed interactive, Web-based tutorial on OVID MEDLINE was acceptable to students, and to identify whether the tutorial improved students’ information skills. Design – Objective and subjective assessment within a small cohort study. Setting – An evidence based practice module within a Master's in Research (MRes) program at the University of Salford, UK. Subjects – A total of 13 usable evaluations were received from graduate students who took an evidence based practice module as part of their MRes coursework. Methods – Information skills (IS) were taught in weeks two and three of a 12-week module on evidence based practice. Each of the two IS sessions lasted approximately three hours. At the beginning of the first session, baseline skills were assessed by asking the students to perform a literature search on either the effectiveness of nursing interventions for smoking cessation, or the effectiveness of rehabilitation after stroke. The OVID MEDLINE tutorial was introduced at the first session, and guided hands-on practice was offered. Homework was given, and between-session use of the tutorial was encouraged. At the end of the second session, students were asked to complete another search in order to assess short-term impact of the tutorial. Both sets of search results were scored using a checklist rubric that looked for Boolean operators, use of MeSH terms, use of limits, number and relevance of references, and other assessment criteria. The rubric was a modified version of a tool published by Rosenberg et al. The tutorial remained available throughout the 12-week module, at which time a systematic literature review was assigned in order to measure longer-term impact. As an additional subjective measurement, a questionnaire regarding the information skills sessions and tutorial was given at the end of the second IS session (week 3). Main Results – Thirteen objective assessments (literature search results) were returned and usable. According to the scored pre-training search, two students could use multiple search techniques correctly and in a systematic manner. The post-training search results indicated that six students could systematically search, which is triple the original number. At the end of the 12-week EBP module, that number had increased to seven students. This demonstrated a significant difference between pre-training and post-training scores (P = 0.040), as well as a significant difference between post-training and post-module scores (P = 0.008). Eight of the subjective questionnaires, which measured perceptions on a five-point scale, were returned. All responses indicated that “the sessions were useful, well structured and interesting” (83). Seven of the eight were entirely positive, either agreeing or strongly agreeing with each of the eleven questions about things such as search skill improvement, information skills knowledge, and confidence in searching. The small sample size made it difficult to generalise these results. Ad hoc comments varied and sometimes contradicted each other, such as one request for simpler tutorial instructions in contrast with the comment that the “tutorial ‘couldn’t be simpler’” (84). Conclusions – Students rated the IS sessions positively, including the Web-based MEDLINE tutorial. Search skills improved, as was demonstrated by comparing pre-training search results with post-training and end-of-module searches. Continuing feedback indicates that the tutorial is used within other departments and programs as a standalone tutorial.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,011 | 0,038 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,011 | 0,003 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».