51 PedsCases Quality Improvement User Survey
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
PedsCases (www.pedscases.com), founded by medical students in 2008, is a free open-access medical education resource for pediatric learners. Currently, the website has 140 podcasts, 70 interactive cases, 11 clinical videos and a number of additional learning tools. PedsCases has experienced considerable growth over the past five years with an increase in content production, exposure and collaboration with the Canadian Paediatric Society. Our goal is to continue to develop innovative learning tools and resources to help learners meet their pediatric learning objectives. To explore the accessibility and utility of PedsCases learning tools and resources; To assess the alignment between PedsCases learning resources and curriculum objectives of paediatric learners at various stages in training, and; To identify and explore avenues for innovation based on user feedback. We designed a 20 question online survey for PedsCases users to inform the above objectives. Non-identifiable demographic information including country of residence, level of training, and career goals were collected. Through both open and closed ended questions, participants were asked to share information about the accessibility of PedsCases resources as well as content appraisal. The form was pilot tested before implementation. An online survey platform, Google Forms, was used to collect and store data. A total of 57 responses were collected over a 6-week period (September 1, 2018 to October 17, 2018). The majority of respondents were Canadian (84.2%). Majority of respondents were either postgraduate residents (35.1%, n=57), or senior medical students (38.6%, n=57). Amongst all participants 77.2% indicated that PedsCases content consistently met their learning objectives. Within the subset of postgraduate residents, this number increased to 85% (n=20). Forty-three percent indicated that PedsCases is a suggested learning resource by their program. Quick summary sheets, guideline summaries and podcasts were identified as preferred resources. Feedback from users focused on improving website functionality including updating the web interface and reorganizing content. Content on PedsCases is meeting the learning objectives of senior medical students and postgraduate trainees. Learners consider podcasts, guideline summaries, and quick summary sheets to be the most useful resources. Based on the feedback received, we plan to continue to develop podcasts, but to invest greater resources into developing quick reference material to meet learner demands. We will also use feedback from the user survey to help design a new and updated PedsCases website.
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 | 0,012 | 0,055 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,004 |
| 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) | 0,024 | 0,008 |
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 ».