Development and Evaluation of Global Child Health Educational Modules
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To determine if a standardized global child health (GCH) modular course for pediatric residents leads to satisfaction, learning, and behavior change. METHODS: Four 1-hour interactive GCH modules were developed addressing priority GCH topics. "Site champions" from 4 Canadian institutions delivered modules to pediatric residents from their respective programs during academic half-days. A pre-post, mixed methods evaluation incorporated satisfaction surveys, multiple-choice knowledge tests, and focus group discussions involving residents and satisfaction surveys from program directors. RESULTS: A total of 125 trainees participated in ≥1 module. Satisfaction levels were high. Focus group participants reported high satisfaction with the concepts taught and the dynamic, participatory approach used, which incorporated multimedia resources. Mean scores on knowledge tests increased significantly postintervention for 3 of the 4 modules (P < .001), and residents cited increases in their practical knowledge, global health awareness, and motivation to learn about global health. Program directors unanimously agreed that the modules were relevant, interesting, and could be integrated within existing formal training time. CONCLUSIONS: A relatively short, participatory, foundational GCH modular curriculum facilitated knowledge acquisition and attitude change. It could be scaled up and serve as a model for other standardized North American curricula.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".