MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2012539549 · doi:10.12968/bjom.2009.17.1.37672

Problem-based learning in a Canadian midwifery programme

2009· article· en· W2012539549 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Midwifery · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicProblem and Project Based Learning
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersMcMaster University
KeywordsClass (philosophy)Problem-based learningMedical educationMathematics educationObstetricsPsychologyMedicineComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A subgroup of a class of Canadian second year midwifery students in the Ontario Midwifery Education Programme took consecutive basic science courses with the same instructor, the first in a problem based learning (PBL) format and the second in lecture format. The students reported that the PBL format was “better” not only for their education but also for their enjoyment. Students that scored in the top half of their class in the PBL format stayed in the top half of their class in the lecture based course. Some students that were below the median in the PBL format were able to score better and move into the top half in the lecture course.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.909
Threshold uncertainty score0.767

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.259 · 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