Meeting the Clinical Education Needs of Community-Based Preceptors: An Environmental Scan to Identify Format and Content for a New Web-Based Resource
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study gathered world-wide information about web-based clinical teaching resources, identified gaps in these resources, and analyzed preceptor clinical education needs as first steps in creating a series of web-based clinical education modules. In addition to an environmental scan of web-based resources, a needs assessment survey was created, distributed, and analyzed. Participants in the survey, representing ten healthcare professions throughout British Columbia, Canada, identified the content that would be most relevant to them and the optimal length of web-based modules. The study identified 15 web-based clinical education topics common across four English-speaking countries and linked them to 31 province-wide learning needs surveyed across ten categories of allied health professionals. The results indicated a strong interest among preceptors in using a web-based resource and provided initial groundwork about the topical content and structural formats for the next phase of the project which will be to develop and evaluate a series of web-based clinical teaching modules.
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 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 | 0.012 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".