MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Undergraduate geriatric education through community service learning

2011· article· en· W1505529917 on OpenAlexaff
Mario Brondani, Alex Chen, Angela W. Chiu, Simon Gooch, Yen Chen Kevin Ko, Kevin Lee, Arash Maskan, Brett Steed

Bibliographic record

VenueGerodontology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDentistry
TopicDental Health and Care Utilization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersDivision of Undergraduate Education
KeywordsMedicineCurriculumService-learningPromotion (chess)Medical educationService (business)Component (thermodynamics)NursingGeriatricsGeriatric dentistryPedagogyFamily medicineOral healthPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Despite the exponential growth of the elderly population worldwide, geriatric education has been a formal component of only a few dental schools' curricula. OBJECTIVE: To describe the geriatric community service learning (CSL) component of the professionalism and community service (PACS) module, and to explore a CSL project carried out by a group of first year dental students at a long-term care facility. METHODS: A literature review was performed to present and describe the CSL component of the PACS module. Students' personal reflections were used to illustrate some of the joys and challenges of experiencing a long-term care facility environment. RESULTS: The newly developed PACS module combines community service learning with the long-term care experience. Students develop, apply and evaluate an educational health promotion activity in a long-term care facility. CONCLUSIONS: The PACS module has encouraged students to acquire comprehensive knowledge and awareness of the needs and dynamics of a long-term care as they collaboratively interacted with personnel from the facility to develop their projects. The authors would like to engage other schools in discussing the need to integrate community-based geriatric education into their dental curricula.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.055

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.003

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.060
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.267 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations41
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGerodontologySame topicDental Health and Care UtilizationFrench-language works237,207