Designing PBL Case Studies for Patient-Centered Care
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
Although patient-centered care is a medical practice ideal and is known to be associated with better patient outcomes, patient-centeredness declines as students progress through medical school. There is a need to integrate components into medical education that develop patient-centeredness through communications skills training, practice-based learning, and reflective practice. PBL can offer a venue for enhancing these types of skills. Creating cases based on stories can enhance the authenticity of the learning environment by telling a narrative from the patient’s perspective while providing engaging, memorable contexts for practicing patient-centered skills. Recounting “thick†narratives through the medium of video and supporting PBL with multimedia resources can provide a richer experience for learning and teaching. Implementing design-based research in conjunction with quantitative and/or qualitative research methodologies could provide new insights into PBL in relation to patient-centered skills and values. Although design-based research can be challenging, using it in combination with other research methodologies has the potential to lead to findings that can make a contribution to situated, constructivist theory within a PBL 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.
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 | 0.004 | 0.041 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 it