MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2751396865 · doi:10.3138/jvme.1016-155r1

Impact of Virtual Patients as Optional Learning Material in Veterinary Biochemistry Education

2017· article· en· W2751396865 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Veterinary Medical Education · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicProblem and Project Based Learning
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVeterinary educationTest (biology)Medical educationRelevance (law)PsychologyMathematics educationMedicinePedagogyBiologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Biochemistry and physiology teachers from veterinary faculties in Hannover, Budapest, and Lublin prepared innovative, computer-based, integrative clinical case scenarios as optional learning materials for teaching and learning in basic sciences. These learning materials were designed to enhance attention and increase interest and intrinsic motivation for learning, thus strengthening autonomous, active, and self-directed learning. We investigated learning progress and success by administering a pre-test before exposure to the virtual patients (vetVIP) cases, offered vetVIP cases alongside regular biochemistry courses, and then administered a complementary post-test. We analyzed improvement in cohort performance and level of confidence in rating questions. Results of the performance in biochemistry examinations in 2014, 2015, and 2016 were correlated with the use of and performance in vetVIP cases throughout biochemistry courses in Hannover. Surveys of students reflected that interactive cases helped them understand the relevance of basic sciences in veterinary education. Differences between identical pre- and post-tests revealed knowledge improvement (correct answers: +28% in Hannover, +9% in Lublin) and enhanced confidence in decision making ("I don't know" answers: -20% in Hannover, -7.5% in Lublin). High case usage and voluntary participation (use of vetVIP cases in Hannover and Lublin >70%, Budapest <1%; response rates in pre-test 72% and post-test 48%) indicated a good increase in motivation for the subject of biochemistry. Despite increased motivation, there was only a weak correlation between performance in final exams and performance in the vetVIP cases. Case-based e-learning could be extended and generated cases should be shared across veterinary faculties.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.644
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.434
Teacher spread0.394 · 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