A324 ASSESSMENT OF STUDENTS’ PERCEPTION OF THE NUTRITION CURRICULUM IN THE UNDERGRADUATE MEDICAL EDUCATION PROGRAM
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nutrition is important in disease prevention and clinical management of patients. Students have previously reported overall dissatisfaction with the nutrition curriculum at Canadian medical schools and unpreparedness in their knowledge and skills in this area. To investigate students’ perspectives about the undergraduate curriculum in nutrition at Dalhousie University medical school. All students in their second (Med-2), third (Med-3), and fourth year (Med-4) of medicine at Dalhousie University were invited to anonymously complete a 23-item online survey. Responses were graded on a 5-point Likert scale with 1 indicating Very Dissatisfied/Strongly Disagree and 5 indicating Very Satisfied/Strongly Agree. The study was conducted at beginning of the second half of the academic year. Of the 340 students, 89 (26.2%) completed the survey. Mean satisfaction with the nutrition curriculum was 2.9 ± 0.81. Most students (81.5%) agreed that they received sufficient training regarding nutrition assessment (mean 3.98 ± 0.89). Students were uncertain about adequacy of training regarding basic nutrition principles (mean 3.51 ± 0.92), nutrition in disease prevention (3.14 ± 1.12), nutrition and disease management (mean 3.48 ± 1.00), role of registered dietitians (mean 2.97 ± 1.05)) and credible nutrition sources (mean 3.14 ± 1.09). Most students did not feel they received sufficient training in dietary intake assessment (mean 2.72 ± 0.94), nutrient requirements across the lifecycle (mean 2.58 ± 0.91), strategies to address food security(mean 2.4 ± 0.95), and malnutrition(mean 2.74 ± 0.93). Med-4 students were significantly more likely to believe they received adequate training about role of dietitians compared to Med-2 (p<0.003). All questions asking about the importance of nutrition were ranked as Agree/Strongly Agree. The majority (79%) agreed that more nutrition instruction is needed. Recommendations to improve learning included a longitudinal nutrition curriculum, clinical application of nutrition principles, evidence-based nutrition sources, and a healthy food environment. When compared to a similar national survey done in 2010, satisfaction with curriculum in nutrition remains unchanged and most students still want more instruction. Medical students recognize the importance of nutrition and would like more education in this area. The undergraduate nutrition curriculum should be enhanced by making it longitudinal and incorporating a variety of education tools to cover competencies such as dietary intake assessment, food security and malnutrition. None
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".