Assessing Dental Students’ Readiness to Treat Populations That Are Underserved: A Scoping Review
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
In North America, all dental schools have adopted some form of community-based dental education (CBDE) or service-learning, but little is known about the areas being researched and reported in published studies. The aim of this study was to conduct a scoping review to determine what areas of research had been conducted to determine the effects of CBDE on dental students' readiness to treat populations that are underserved. A systematic search of articles published in English or French since 2000 was performed on July 29, 2015, and combined quantitative and qualitative synthesis of data was conducted. Of the 32 studies evaluated, 23 (72%) were quantitative, seven (22%) were qualitative, and two were multi-method. The majority (66%) used self-report methods, most frequently surveys. Participants in 50% of the studies were fourth-year dental students; the others assessed third- and fourth-year (13%), first- and second-year (6%), and first-year (13%) students. Dentists were the participants in three studies (9%), with dentists and students in one study (3%). Either the types of populations receiving care were unspecified or four or more groups were pooled together in 25 studies (78%), while two focused on children, one on rural populations, one on elderly populations, two on persons with special health care needs, and one on low-income populations. The study areas were wide-ranging, but generally fell into three categories: student performance (37.5%), teaching approaches and evaluation methods (37.5%), and perceptions of CBDE (25%). This review identified many research gaps for determining whether students are prepared to treat populations that are underserved. The disparate nature of CBDE research demonstrates a compelling argument for determining elements that define student readiness to care for patients who are underserved and for research that includes the voices of patients, curriculum development, and more comprehensive and rigorous evaluation methodologies.
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.
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 | 0,003 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 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 découle