Current and future health care professionals attitudes toward and knowledge of statistics: How confidence influences learning
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Health care professionals require some understanding of statistics to successfully implement evidence based practice. Developing competency in statistical reasoning is necessary for students training in health care administration, research, and clinical care. Recently, the interest in healthcare professional's attitudes toward statistics has increased substantially due to evidence that these attitudes can hinder professionalism developing an understanding of statistical concepts. METHODS: In this study, we analyzed pre- and post-instruction attitudes towards and knowledge of statistics obtained from health science graduate students, including nurses and nurse practitioners, enrolled in an introductory graduate course in statistics (n = 165). RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: Results show that the students already held generally positive attitudes toward statistics at the beginning of course. However, these attitudes-along with the students' statistical proficiency-improved after 10 weeks of instruction. The results have implications for curriculum design and delivery methods as well as for health professionals' effective use of statistics in critically evaluating and utilizing research in their practices.
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.
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 | 0.007 |
| 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 it