Gett’n on the bus: evaluation of <i>Sentinel City®3.0</i> virtual simulation in community/population health clinical placement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives The purpose of this project was to implement and evaluate the integration of a computer-based virtual simulation program into a community clinical course as an alternative or complement to conventional clinical with agencies or neighbourhoods. Securing quality community health clinical opportunities for undergraduate nursing students remains challenging. In addition, evidence of a theory-practice gap in community clinical education, particularly in non-traditional settings, suggests that nurse educators need to adopt different pedagogies to ensure that students will gain competencies necessary to practice community/population health nursing. In response, we piloted the use of Sentinel City®3.0, a virtual reality simulation program. Method A 5-point Likert-style questionnaire was administered to students randomly assigned to different clinical placements. Results Results indicated that there were no learning outcomes in which students in Sentinel City®3.0 reported percentages lower than students in agencies or geographical neighbourhoods. When there were statistically significant differences, students engaged in Sentinel City®3.0 performed better than students in other experiences. Conclusion We recommend further exploration of multi-contextual pedagogies for community clinical.
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 | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".