MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2547825615 · doi:10.4103/0253-7613.193321

Effectiveness of student-led objective tutorials in pharmacology teaching to medical students

2016· article· en· W2547825615 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIndian Journal of Pharmacology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInnovative Teaching Methods
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityJewish General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTest (biology)Intervention (counseling)Clinical pharmacologyMann–Whitney U testMedical educationComputer scienceMathematics educationPsychologyMedicinePharmacologyInternal medicineNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<br><b>Objectives:</b> Current teaching in pharmacology is passive with less emphasis on clinical application. There is a need to incorporate newer instructional designs into pharmacology. Student-led objective tutorial (SLOT) is one of the novel designs to enhance interest among learners, provide opportunities for group learning, and facilitate self-directed learning. This study aims to assess the effectiveness of SLOTs over conventional tutorials (CTs) in pharmacology and to obtain feedback from the students regarding their perceptions about it.<br><b>Subjects and Methods:</b> The regular batch of MBBS 2<sup>nd</sup> professional in pharmacology was randomly divided into two groups. Five topics from central nervous system (CNS) were selected. One group received SLOT as the instructional strategy, whereas the other group went through CTs. At the end of the module, a written test was conducted to assess the effectiveness of both strategies. The students provided feedback regarding their experience using a prevalidated questionnaire.<br><b>Statistical Analysis:</b> The mean scores of both the groups were analyzed using Mann–Whitney U-test.<br><b>Results:</b> There was no significant difference in the mean scores of the end of the module test. However, the overall passing percentage was significantly higher in the intervention group (<i>P</i> = 0.043). A total of 45.71% students favored it as a future tutorial method and expressed that SLOT enhanced their ability to learn independently.<br><b>Conclusion:</b> SLOT is an effective teaching–learning method to teach pharmacology to medical undergraduates. It enhances interest among learners and increases the ability to learn independently.<br><b>Key message:</b> <br>Student led objective tutorial (SLOT) serve as critical determinants for self-learning and improve analytical skills of students. It enhances interest among learners, provide opportunities for group learning and facilitate self-directed learning. SLOT can be introduced as an interactive teaching learning strategy in pharmacology.

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 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)0.043
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.306
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0430.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.492
Teacher spread0.465 · 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