54 Consistency in a Pediatric Developmental Disability Elective for Preclinical Medical Students: Five Years of Student Experience
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Background There is an increasing recognition for medical students to receive more training in caring for patients with developmental disabilities (PWDD). Studies have found that providing training and encounter opportunities with PWDD for medical students improves their attitudes, comfort level, and knowledge. PWDD can have more sensitivity to changes in health than others, highlighting the importance of providing educational opportunities for medical professionals. To mitigate these outcomes, this preclinical 12-hour elective: “Developing Skills for Developmental Disabilities” (DSDD) was developed with the primary learning objective of improving students’ knowledge of and attitudes toward developmental disabilities in pediatrics. Objectives The current study’s objective was to evaluate the consistency of students’ perceived confidence ratings in assessing and managing children presenting with developmental delay or disability, despite changes in workplace educational setting across 5 years. Design/Methods Students received 6 hours of content-specific didactic teachings in addition to the standard second year developmental pediatrics curriculum. Content was provided by a team of developmental pediatricians and physiatrists. Didactic session topics included child development, estimating developmental age, assistive technologies, and breaking bad news, to supplement the 6 hours of clinical experience at a rehabilitation hospital. Students attended medical assessments with the opportunity to conduct a brief interview with the child’s family, observe pediatric PWDD in treatment programs, and interact with interdisciplinary teams. Students were given pre- and post-elective self-assessment surveys administered on a 5-point Likert scale. Questions pertained to students’ self-perceived comfort and knowledge regarding pediatric PWDD. Scores pre- and post-elective were used to calculate relative improvement of participants. Results 120 students enrolled in DSDD, with 94 students meeting elective requirements. On average, 77.2% (SD = 6.2%) of students were female and 81.4% (SD = 12.9%) reported having prior experience with PWDD. Statistically significant (p<0.05) relative improvements were present in 9 of 10 scores for 2 of 5 years and all 10 in the other 3 years. Improved scores involved increases in confidence in interacting with PWDD, taking histories, recommending appropriate resources to families, and estimating developmental age. Conclusion DSDD may support acquisition of clinically relevant skills beyond those learned in the standard curriculum, as students consistently reported improvements in confidence across the same domains over 5 cohort years of this elective. The demonstration of maintained improvement is important because it may be translatable to future clinical practice and have implications towards optimizing outcomes for pediatric PWDD.
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 | 0,004 | 0,009 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
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 ».