Fear and Loathing: Undergraduate Nursing Students’ Experiences of a Mandatory Course in Applied Statistics
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
This article describes the results of a qualitative research study evaluating nursing students' experiences of a mandatory course in applied statistics, and the perceived effectiveness of teaching methods implemented during the course. Fifteen nursing students in the third year of a four-year baccalaureate program in nursing participated in focus groups before and after taking the mandatory course in statistics. The interviews were transcribed and analyzed using content analysis to reveal four major themes: (i) "one of those courses you throw out?," (ii) "numbers and terrifying equations," (iii) "first aid for statistics casualties," and (iv) "re-thinking curriculum." Overall, the data revealed that although nursing students initially enter statistics courses with considerable skepticism, fear, and anxiety, there are a number of concrete actions statistics instructors can take to reduce student fear and increase the perceived relevance of courses in statistics.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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