Integration of Persons With HIV in a Problem-Based Tutorial: A Qualitative Study
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This qualitative study examined the effect of using persons with HIV-AIDS (PHAs) as facilitators of learning in an interdisciplinary problem-based learning curriculum. DESCRIPTION: Ten students representing 5 professions (medicine, occupational therapy, physical therapy, nursing, and social work) volunteered to participate in an 8-week course on rehabilitation issues in HIV. Two tutorial groups met weekly to discuss problems with the assistance of a faculty tutor and a PHA. Students completed a weekly journal outlining their experiences. At completion of the course, students participated in semistructured interviews. A qualitative analysis of the transcribed interviews and the journals was undertaken. EVALUATION: The PHA provided a unique perspective on living with HIV, acted as a resource, and challenged the students' values and assumptions. The presence of the PHA also presented challenges in that the students worried their comments might offend them. CONCLUSIONS: PHAs contributed significantly to students' learning and can be successfully incorporated into problem-based tutorials.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.016 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it