MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2073592336 · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2929.2007.02738.x

Structured clinical case PowerPoint™ presentations for distributed learning

2007· article· en· W2073592336 sur OpenAlexaffabout
Kim Blake, Ada Poranek, Kate Macculloch

Notice bibliographique

RevueMedical Education · 2007
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineBusiness, Management and Accounting
ThématiqueHealthcare Systems and Technology
Établissements canadiensIzaak Walton Killam Health CentreDalhousie University
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésContext (archaeology)CurriculumMedical educationRelevance (law)Variety (cybernetics)MedicineConsistency (knowledge bases)Computer scienceMultimediaPsychologyPedagogy

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Context and setting Clinical case presentations were introduced as a core component of the paediatrics rotation. Presentations took place in a multimedia conference room on the medical school campus. Bridgit™ conferencing software allowed students at other sites to participate in the presentations in real time. The presented cases offered an opportunity to ensure the objectives of the rotation were met, allowed students in smaller centres to be involved with larger groups and provided potentially more variation in case content. Presentations were subsequently edited by faculty staff and students and posted on the university intranet (Dalmedix) for asynchronous learning. Why the idea was necessary Students are exposed to unique patients and conditions, including disorders that are seasonal. The structured clinical cases offered an opportunity to ensure a variety of diagnoses were covered. Students in smaller centres can be actively involved with larger groups and offer variation in case content. The posted cases also represented a valuable resource for students in all years who are preparing for elective work in paediatrics, clinical rotations and examinations. What was done At the end of the paediatrics rotation, student pairs presented a patient who met Year 3 paediatrics curriculum objectives. Templates for PowerPoint™ presentations were provided in order to maintain consistency in case style. Presentations were required to be 10 minutes in duration, visual, interactive, to include question and answer sessions, a basic science slide and a multiple-choice question with relevance to the case. Paper copies of the cases were distributed to faculty for checking of content. These were then edited by elective students, who subsequently posted them on Dalmedix. Students were asked to complete questionnaires regarding their learning experience, with 9 items to be answered on a Likert scale of 1–5 (1 = strongly disagree, 5 = strongly agree) and 2 open-ended questions. Currently, more questionnaire data are being collected. A total of 65 PowerPoint™ case presentations have been posted on the Dalhousie intranet, available to medical students for learning. Evaluation of results and impact Over the past 3 years, 328 students have participated. One clerk was unable to obtain consent to make a presentation from the patient and family. Case-based PowerPoint™ presentations shared using Bridgit™ conferencing software have been an invaluable learning tool for medical students. Pilot questionnaires administered in 2004−05 and 2005−06 have indicated that 87% of clerks found creating and presenting a case presentation a useful learning experience. In addition, 85% of students thought cases available on the university's intranet would be a useful learning tool and 83% of clerks found it useful to watch other groups present (mean Likert score 4·2 ± 0·6). The clerks identified 3 main strengths in the case presentation learning process: learning about specific cases; practising presentations, and patient contact. Students found writing a multiple-choice question the most challenging aspect of the presentation (mean Likert score 3·9 ± 0·8). Due to the success of the case-based presentation learning component in paediatrics, a similar format has been launched in obstetrics and gynaecology. Discussion about involving an overseas medical school is underway and the cases are to be implemented as a distributed education component in a new medical school.

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 enseignants

Ni 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.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,005
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,025
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesCharge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Méthodes · Signal consensuel: Méthodes
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,350
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,927

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0050,025
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0020,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,001
Bibliométrie0,0020,002
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,001
Communication savante0,0040,003
Science ouverte0,0040,009
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,003
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,3500,127

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.

Tête enseignante Opus0,027
Tête enseignante GPT0,400
Écart entre enseignants0,373 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_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 découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreMéthodes

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations2
Publié2007
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueMedical EducationMême sujetHealthcare Systems and TechnologyTravaux en français237 207