Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The notion of transferable skills is part of the comprehensive education model for dietetic practice. Dietitians' perspectives were collected to determine their understanding of the concept and which dietetic skills they considered transferable in long-term and acute care environments. METHODS: The study included a purposive sample of 14 dietitians representing long-term and acute care internship training and employment. The dietitians completed a questionnaire and were interviewed. RESULTS: All respondents demonstrated an understanding of the concept of transferability of skills. Results indicated that the majority believed dietetic entry-level competencies could be achieved in both long-term and acute care environments. While the majority believed competencies could be transferred from one environment to another, issues were raised about transfer from long-term care to acute care. These issues included limited client communication, fewer resources, and less opportunity for exposure to skill areas. Interpretation of the term "skill," one-way transferability, and level of competence required for the particular working environment emerged as challenges to operationalization of the concept. CONCLUSIONS: Transferability of skills within dietetic practice requires further investigation if it is to be fully understood and used to its full potential.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".