Student and faculty perceptions of research in nutrition and dietetics: A qualitative investigation.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Evidence is fundamental to the practice of nutrition and dietetics yet few dietitians pursue research as a career path. The aim of this study was to explore elements of undergraduate teaching and learning in nutrition and dietetics that supports research skills development and inspires students to pursue research. This researched formed part of a process intended to inform curriculum development for undergraduate dietetic education. In-depth interviews with dietitians (past undergraduate students) pursuing research degrees and academics embedding research skills within their teaching and learning in nutrition and dietetics and other health professions were conducted, transcribed and analysed using thematic analysis. Eight students and five academics participated in the study. Qualitative analysis revealed three key themes. (i) Research in nutrition and dietetics is fundamental to practice; (ii) There are a number of internal and external cultivators and capacities for research; and (iii) strategies and approaches for research skill development should start early, continue through a curriculum and promote independence. This study identified that students and academics view research as fundamental to the practice of dietetics. Personal drivers as well as external factors enhance involvement in research. Research skills teaching should commence early and be embedded across whole curricula. The findings can be used to create teaching and learning opportunities that support research skill development and inspire dietitians to pursue research.
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 | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".