MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A collaborative approach for improving information literacy skills of dental hygiene students

2003· article· en· W2029300506 on OpenAlexaff
Sandra J Cobban, Linda Seale

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Dental Hygiene · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth Sciences Research and Education
Canadian institutionsCapital District Health AuthorityUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLikert scaleThe InternetMedical educationMedicineInformation literacyUsabilityInclusion (mineral)Dental hygienePsychologyComputer scienceWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Evidence-based practitioners need to develop proficiency in locating and evaluating necessary information from a variety of sources, a concept known as information literacy. One potential source of information is the World Wide Web; however, the wide range in the quality of information available through the Internet indicates a need for strong critical appraisal skills. OBJECTIVES: To facilitate development of these skills in dental hygiene students, dental hygiene faculty collaborated with a librarian to implement a project to improve information literacy skills and integrate the use of the Internet into dental hygiene course work. METHODS: Students were required to develop a scenario about an aspect of dental hygiene practice, such as client health concern, practice management, or selection of an appropriate dental hygiene therapy. Students were to search the Internet, locate and evaluate a website that could address their scenario, and post this information and additional comments to a text-based computer conferencing section of a class website. Web CT software, particularly the computer conferencing function, was used to support asynchronous online activities. Student evaluation of the assignment was conducted using a 5-point Likert scale. RESULTS: Mean ratings for structure variables ranged from 3.94 to 3.81. Slightly lower mean ratings for process variables, ranging from 3.74 to 3.21, suggest room for improvement to activities. Mean ratings for outcome variables, ranging from 4.42 to 3.29, suggest achievement of the desired learning outcomes. CONCLUSION: Evaluation results warrant the continued inclusion of asynchronous online activities in conjunction with face-to-face classroom instruction.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.269
Threshold uncertainty score0.420

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.454
Teacher spread0.427 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Dental HygieneSame topicHealth Sciences Research and EducationFrench-language works237,207