Motivating influences and ability‐based outcomes of dental hygiene baccalaureate education in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There is a scarcity of studies on Canadian baccalaureate dental hygienists. As discussions about baccalaureate education for dental hygiene continue on a national level, examining outcomes of earning a dental hygiene degree is paramount. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the motivating reasons and ability-based outcomes of earning a Bachelor of Dental Science in Dental Hygiene (BDSc) degree from the University of British Columbia (UBC), Canada. METHODS: UBC dental hygiene entry-to-practice (ETP) and degree-completion (DC) graduates (n = 116; 32%) from 1994 to 2016 participated in an online mixed-methods survey. Survey questions explored motivating reasons for pursuing dental hygiene degree education and abilities gained during their degree. RESULTS: Primary reasons for pursuing a degree were personal satisfaction (82%), increasing knowledge base (82%), increasing employment opportunities (78%), status/recognition of a degree (76%), accessing graduate education (68%) and improving critical thinking abilities (61%). For DC graduates, abilities strengthened included enhanced skills for appraising research (92%), enhanced critical thinking and problem-solving skills (90%), enhanced skills for retrieving scientific information (88%) and increased value for lifelong learning (84%). Enhanced abilities positively influenced client care in the areas of evidence-based decision-making, communicating information to clients, and collaborating with other professionals. Overall, 93% of respondents believe a baccalaureate degree should be the ETP credential for dental hygiene because it enhances critical thinking and better prepares graduates for diverse roles in society with more complex populations. CONCLUSION: The results highlight the impact of baccalaureate education on dental hygiene practice in Canada.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".