Perception de l'avenir de la profession de diététiste par les étudiants finissants en nutrition du Québec
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The main objective is to examine the perception Quebec nutrition students have of the future of the profession based on critical incidents they have reported. METHODS: An electronic questionnaire was sent to the 158 nutrition students graduating from the three Quebec universities offering a nutrition program. The critical incident technique was chosen as the qualitative method. A theme and subtheme table was devised from the analysis of the incidents and entered into Excel to synthesize the data. Results: Positive incidents were associated with the recognition of other professionals and clients, an understanding of the scope of the profession and related opportunities, and the impact of nutrition interventions. Negative incidents mainly pertained to lack of recognition, competition, the realization that employment opportunities are limited, work conditions, and the ability to assert their roles as dietitians. Most of the incidents reported occurred during practicums. CONCLUSIONS: Leadership competencies should be developed to help dietitians take their place on care teams and create a space for themselves in the public sphere. Furthermore, practicum experiences are fundamental in the development of the image students have of the profession.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".