Functional Elements of Entrusted Professional Activities for Dental Educators: Protocol for a Scoping Review
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Assessing the competencies of health profession educators presents significant challenges, leading to the suggestion of implementing Entrustable Professional Activities (EPAs) as a potential solution. EPAs refer to the authority granted to individuals to perform tasks with a specified level of trust and competence. The concept of EPAs emerged from the complexities of competency-based medical education. This scoping review highlights the emerging yet underdeveloped field of EPAs for dental educators. Despite their established utility in medical education, the concept remains relatively novel for dental educators, with limited literature and inconsistent application across studies. OBJECTIVE: This paper presents a scoping review protocol aimed at systematically elucidating the extent, range, and nature of the literature on EPAs for dental educators, as evaluated in the included resources. This review seeks to answer the following research question: what are the key functional elements of EPAs for dental educators as described in the existing literature? METHODS: This scoping review will be conducted in accordance with the framework outlined by Arksey and O'Malley, enhanced by the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) guidelines. The literature search will use a 3-step strategy across 5 electronic databases (PubMed, Google Scholar, Scopus, Cochrane Library, and ProQuest), along with additional screening of gray literature. Primary data from relevant studies published from the introduction of EPAs in 2005 through 2024 will be analyzed. This review will include peer-reviewed literature focused on EPAs, specifically those involving dental educators in undergraduate, postgraduate, or continuing education contexts. Studies of any design (qualitative, quantitative, or mixed methods), as well as conceptual papers and reviews, will be considered. Only English-language studies will be included. The literature search process will involve a librarian, while study selection and evidence charting will be conducted by 4 independent reviewers. These reviewers will independently screen titles, abstracts, and full texts against the inclusion criteria. Data will be charted using a standardized extraction form and analyzed thematically. RESULTS: Findings will be presented in both tabular and narrative formats, highlighting the range, characteristics, and key components of EPAs relevant to dental educators. In addition, these findings will be mapped to the competencies of dental educators. This review is estimated to be completed within 6 months and aims to identify gaps for future research, ultimately supporting the advancement of competency-based dental education. The results of this review will serve as a foundation for a larger study focused on developing a framework of EPAs specifically tailored for dental educators. CONCLUSIONS: The identification of EPAs and their themes provides an initial framework that can guide the development of more structured, competency-based academic roles for dental educators. A tailored EPA framework holds promise not only for clarifying faculty expectations and enhancing performance assessment but also for supporting faculty development. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/74225.
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 | 0,114 | 0,141 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,005 | 0,005 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,011 | 0,016 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,019 | 0,017 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,005 | 0,006 |
| Communication savante | 0,008 | 0,009 |
| Science ouverte | 0,006 | 0,008 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,009 | 0,007 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,054 | 0,011 |
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 ».