MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2397519120 · doi:10.5430/jct.v5n1p124

Exposing Pharmacy Students to Challenges Surrounding Care of Young Children via a Novel Role-Emerging Placement

2016· article· en· W2397519120 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Efi Mantzourani, Rhian Deslandes, Laura Ellis, Greg Williams

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Curriculum and Teaching · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInnovations in Medical Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPharmacySession (web analytics)Medical educationDiversity (politics)Health carePsychologyWrightPerceptionNursingMedicineComputer scienceSociologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Embedding opportunities for undergraduate pharmacy students to move between academic and practiceenvironments is key to transform their perception of patient care and to facilitate learning of the skills required forthe changing profession (Smith and Darracott, 2011). An approach adopted by many health care professions toprepare students for diversity with their field, is exposure to non-workplace environments in the form ofrole-emerging placements (REPs) (Whiteford and Wright St-Clair, 2002).The study presented is part of an ongoing action research project; this cycle focusses on exposing students tochallenges surrounding care of young children. Barriers and facilitators arising from an earlier pilot of REPs in theCardiff School of Pharmacy were considered when designing and implementing innovative placements for entrylevel pharmacy undergraduates in venues where mother and toddler groups were running. Students participated in apre-placement workshop where they explored a flexible list of questions to facilitate their interactions. Placementswere supervised by members of staff, who supported students throughout their experience and during a group debriefat the end of each session. Students were called to reflect further during a post-placement workshop with the rest oftheir colleagues.The full cohort of students submitted a copy of their overall reflections. Entries were analysed via thematic analysisto provide an overview. The sessions raised awareness of issues when providing pharmaceutical care to children andcontributed to students’ professional development. Challenges to their interactions were identified and suggestionsfor improvement were made. Results will inform structure and content of future REPs.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.397
Threshold uncertainty score0.337

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.338 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations10
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Curriculum and TeachingSame topicInnovations in Medical EducationFrench-language works237,207