Dietitians’ Perceptions of Precepting: Knowledge, Skills, Attitudes, Barriers, and Training
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The extent to which dietitians agreed or disagreed with key informants' perceptions of precepting knowledge, skills, and attitudes (KSA), training needs, and barriers was determined. METHODS: A 98-item survey was developed and distributed electronically to Dietitians of Canada members (n=5376). RESULTS: Of the 750 respondents who completed the survey (14% response rate), more than 95% agreed that preceptors should have knowledge of promoting learning and skills acquisition, and of learner assessment and evaluation. More than 90% of respondents agreed that preceptors should have skills in planning, teaching, coaching, research, facilitation, and evaluation. Differences in respondents' perceptions of preceptor participation in practice-based research differed with years of experience. Respondents with fewer than five years of experience had a higher level of agreement that preceptors should participate in practice-based research than did those with more experience (P<0.05). Respondents indicated that barriers to precepting training were insufficient time (93%) and work environments not supportive of precepting (64%). CONCLUSIONS: The findings articulate the KSA, training needs, and barriers to precepting considered significant for dietitian preceptors. The results are important for the advocacy for resources to support the training and development of preceptors, upon whom sustainability of the profession depends.
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 | 0.006 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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".