Perceptions of the Human–Animal Bond in Veterinary Education of Veterinarians in Washington State: Structured versus Experiential Learning
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
RATIONALE FOR THE STUDY: The purpose of this research was to describe Washington private practitioners' beliefs about how the Human-Animal Bond (HAB) should be addressed in DVM curricula and continuing education. METHODOLOGY: 1,602 Washington veterinarians in private practice were asked to participate in an online survey that addressed the importance of HAB and of DVM/post-DVM HAB education. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: The response rate was 25.9% (415/1,602). Eighty-one percent (334/412) of respondents indicated that the HAB was important to their decisions to become veterinarians. The HAB was more important to the most recent graduates than to earliest graduates and to females than to males. Forty-four percent (184/415) of respondents considered mentoring to be the best way to learn about the HAB while in veterinary school. Of the 40% (165/415) of respondents who indicated that their veterinary schools offered structured learning on the HAB, 89% (145/163) said they had participated in it. Seven percent (29/415) indicated that entry-level veterinarians were very prepared to identify and facilitate the HAB, while 54% (224/415) said that they were somewhat prepared. Only 32% (131/415) had participated in any HAB structured learning since having started practicing, and the earliest graduates were twice as likely to have participated as the most recent graduates. More than half (55%, 223/407) disagreed or strongly disagreed that post-DVM, the best way to learn about the HAB is through structured learning. However, 83% (342/414) agreed that continuing-education credits should be given for HAB classes. Eighty-six percent (358/414) supported additional HAB research. Ninety-seven percent (402/414) agreed that the best way to learn about the HAB is through experience. These results suggest that veterinarians do not value HAB structured learning as much as experiential learning and that they are not very confident in recent graduates' abilities regarding the HAB. We propose HAB structured learning in the first three years of DVM education, complemented by the incorporation of the HAB into clinical rotations and post-DVM continuing education.
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 distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
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 tête enseignante, 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 ».