Professional and Veterinary Competencies: Addressing Human Relations and the Human–Animal Bond in Veterinary Medicine
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Purpose – The purpose of this study was to determine the nature and degree of coverage of human relations and the human– animal bond in veterinary curricula across North America. The attitudes and opinions of a cohort of veterinary students and alumni about human relations skills and human–animal bond training in the veterinary program was also investigated. Method – Twenty veterinary schools across North America were contacted and data were collected regarding their coverage of human relations and the human–animal bond in the curriculum. A survey was developed to measure attitudes and opinions about this type of training. The survey was disseminated to students in years 1 to 4 and alumni from the Ontario Veterinary College (OVC). Data were analyzed descriptively. Results – Based on availability of contact people, 20 schools in North America were contacted, and all participated in the study. Each of the veterinary schools surveyed has incorporated strategies for teaching human relations skills through required courses, electives, guest speakers, and/or community service programs. The overall participation rate for OVC students was 53%. Ninetynine percent of all students surveyed agreed that their ability to deal with people using effective human relations skills was a concern, and all students said they would like to receive more training in this area. There was a 41% participation rate for OVC alumni. Fifty-five percent of alumni said they had learned enough in the veterinary program to employ effective human relations skills in practice, yet 65% felt they had not received enough instruction in addressing the human–animal bond specifically. Conclusions – It is apparent that veterinary schools recognize the need to prepare entry-level practitioners to deal with the human–animal bond and with human relations. It is also evident that students and practitioners value receiving information of this nature in the curriculum and desire further training. Specific learning objectives for veterinary curricula have been outlined based on findings from this study.
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 | 0,004 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| 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 ».