Breast disease and undergraduate medical education: a randomized trial to assess the effect of a home study module on medical student performance.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This study sought to demonstrate the effectiveness of a home study module (HSM) on student performance at a large urban medical school. METHOD: Second-year students were randomized to receive: 1) a HSM in addition to regular teaching of clinical breast examination or, 2) the regular teaching alone. The HSM included adult learning principles, problem-based learning, and practice guidelines. Students completed a pretest, a post-test, and course evaluation. The pre- and post-tests examined students' knowledge and comfort levels. RESULTS: Of 176 students, 136 agreed to participate and 127 completed both pre- and post-tests. Baseline pretest indicated no significant difference between the intervention and control groups. Post-test showed that students receiving the HSM gained significantly more knowledge than had the control group, and their comfort levels shifted nonsignificantly more. Student evaluations indicated perceived value of the HSM. INTERPRETATION: Student performance can be enhanced and comfort levels increased by providing a critical core of knowledge in the form of a HSM. This approach may be applicable to other important subjects.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".