MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2993619594 · doi:10.5539/gjhs.v11n13p158

Experiential Learning Curriculum Delivery Approach for Quality Improvement in Resource Limited Settings: Mobile Learning for Point-of-Care Technologies

2019· article· en· W2993619594 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Nkosinothando Chamane, Tivani P. Mashamba-Thompson

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Journal of Health Science · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBiomedical and Engineering Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExperiential learningCurriculumMedicineHealth careResource (disambiguation)Service delivery frameworkKnowledge managementMedical educationQuality (philosophy)NursingService (business)PsychologyBusinessComputer sciencePedagogyMarketingPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Despite impressive progress that has been made in the provision of health care services to all, the issue of quality service delivery still remains a challenge particularly for point-of-care (POC) diagnostics in resource-limited-settings. Poor competency of primary health care workers in these settings has been shown to be amongst the main contributors to poor quality service delivery. FINDINGS: Participatory-based continuous professional development (CPD) strategies to support technology advancements in health care are recommended. Experiential learning approaches have been shown to be efficient in supplementing traditional teaching methods for both health care students and professionals. These approaches have been shown to further contribute towards continuous skills development and lifelong learning. CONCLUSION: This review therefore provided an overview of literature on experiential learning as one of CPD approaches in relation to health care service improvement in resource-limited setting. In addition, this review has recommended a mobile-based experiential learning approach to help deliver a quality POC technology curriculum to Primary health care-based workers in resource-limited settings.

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 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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.483
Threshold uncertainty score0.333

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.277 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobal Journal of Health ScienceSame topicBiomedical and Engineering EducationFrench-language works237,207