Final-Year Veterinary Students' Perceptions of Their Communication Competencies and a Communication Skills Training Program Delivered in a Primary Care Setting and Based on Kolb's Experiential Learning Theory
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Veterinary graduates require effective communication skills training to successfully transition from university into practice. Although the literature has supported the need for veterinary student communication skills training programs, there is minimal research using learning theory to design programs and explore students' perceptions of such programs. This study investigated veterinary students' perceptions of (1) their communication skills and (2) the usefulness of a communication skills training program designed with Kolb's Experiential Learning Theory (ELT) as a framework and implemented in a primary care setting. Twenty-nine final-year veterinary students from the Ontario Veterinary College attended a 3-week communication skills training rotation. Pre- and post-training surveys explored their communication objectives, confidence in their communication skills, and the usefulness of specific communication training strategies. The results indicated that both before and after training, students were most confident in building rapport, displaying empathy, recognizing how bonded a client is with his or her pet, and listening. They were least confident in managing clients who were angry or not happy with the charges and who monopolized the appointment. Emotionally laden topics, such as breaking bad news and managing euthanasia discussions, were also identified as challenging and in need of improvement. Interactive small-group discussions and review of video-recorded authentic client appointments were most valuable for their learning and informed students' self-awareness of their non-verbal communication. These findings support the use of Kolb's ELT as a theoretical framework and of video review and reflection to guide veterinary students' learning of communication skills in a primary care setting.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".