Pharmacology Education in North American Dental Schools: The Basic Science Survey Series
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As part of the Basic Science Survey Series for Dentistry, members of the American Dental Education Association (ADEA) Physiology, Pharmacology, and Therapeutics Section surveyed directors of physiology courses in North American dental schools. The survey was designed to assess, among other things, faculty affiliation and experience of course directors, teaching methods, general course content and emphasis, extent of interdisciplinary (shared) instruction, and impact of recent curricular changes. Responses were received from forty-four of sixty-seven (65.7 percent) U.S. and Canadian dental schools. The findings suggest the following: substantial variation exists in instructional hours, faculty affiliation, class size, and interdisciplinary nature of physiology courses; physiology course content emphasis is similar between schools; student contact hours in physiology, which have remained relatively stable in the past fifteen years, are starting to be reduced; recent curricular changes have often been directed towards enhancing the integrative and clinically relevant aspects of physiology instruction; and a trend toward innovative content delivery, such as use of computer-assisted instruction, is evident. Data from this study may be useful to physiology course directors, curriculum committees, and other dental educators with an interest in integrative and interprofessional education.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".