Eliciting the Student Perspective on Point-of-Care Diagnostic Testing in Association with a Primary Care Rotation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The majority of North American veterinary students enter general practice upon graduation. Tertiary teaching hospitals provide extensive case exposure; however, primary case responsibility and decision making are often provided by clinical faculty members. Primary care services at veterinary teaching hospitals are a central component of student preparation for general practice. Primary care cases allow students to function as the primary clinician, making real-time clinical decisions. To better emulate a private practice veterinary hospital, point-of-care diagnostics (hematology, blood chemistry, and blood coagulation) were introduced into two primary care services in North American veterinary colleges. One objective of the study was to determine the influence of point-of-care testing on students' diagnostic selections and attitudes toward point-of-care diagnostics. An additional objective was to determine student perception of the impact of the primary care service on the development of clinical decision making and their technical skills. During the study period, 166 students voluntarily completed a pre-rotation survey, and 81 completed a post-rotation survey. Questions elicited student opinions regarding the value and application of point-of-care diagnostics in a general practice setting and whether a primary care service impacted the students' overall comfort level with case management. Point-of-care diagnostics were recognized as significant assets, with 98% of students agreeing that point-of-care diagnostics improved patient care and outcome. Results supported that primary care services provide valuable experiences for students as primary case clinicians, with 93% of respondents agreeing or strongly agreeing that the rotation improved their diagnostic ability and confidence.
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 | 0.001 | 0.012 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".