MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1980463362 · doi:10.1002/oti.149

Development of the Competency Based Fieldwork Evaluation (CBFE)

2001· article· en· W1980463362 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueOccupational Therapy International · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInnovations in Medical Education
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOccupational therapyVariety (cybernetics)RehabilitationScale (ratio)Medical educationRating scaleSet (abstract data type)Test (biology)Core competencyProfessional developmentPsychologyHealth careMedicineComputer sciencePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Recent changes in health care have contributed to an increase in community care and a consequent increase in community fieldwork sites in professional practice education. Evaluations of student performance designed before this transition are limited in their applicability across diverse settings. This article describes the development of a student performance evaluation, the Competency Based Fieldwork Evaluation (CBFE), based on a set of core competencies. Specifically, the CBFE was created to be used across a variety of rehabilitation professions: (a) to evaluate student performance in a variety of fieldwork settings, (b) to provide a cumulative record of student competency acquisition, and (c) to ensure competency for entry to practice. Focus group discussions and review of evaluations across disciplines led to the compilation of seven competencies common to all rehabilitation professions: (1) practice knowledge, (2) clinical reasoning, (3) facilitating change, (4) professional interactions, (5) communication, (6) professional development, and (7) performance management. A pilot version of the CBFE, using a visual analogue scale (VAS) for each competency, was field tested. Content analysis supported the seven competencies. However, concerns regarding the use of a VAS led to revision to a numeric rating scale with descriptors reflecting the stages of professional development. Evidence to date supports the use of the CBFE as a measure of developing clinical skills across diverse settings. However, most data have come from occupational therapy students. Future research is needed to evaluate the numeric rating scale, the reliability of the CBFE, and to evaluate the applicability of the CBFE across rehabilitation professions. Copyright © 2001 Whurr Publishers Ltd.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.424
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.078
GPT teacher head0.409
Teacher spread0.331 · 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