MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3088710465 · doi:10.29309/tpmj/2020.27.09.4530

Interest in research among the undergraduate students of medical and dental colleges of Pakistan.

2020· article· en· W3088710465 on OpenAlexaff
Ahmad Liaquat, Tahmasub Faraz Tayyab, Tooba Saeed, Muhammad Azeem, Ansa Naheed, Nabeela Riaz, Abdul Samad Tayyab

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Professional Medical Journal · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHealth and Medical Research Impacts
Canadian institutionsCollège Montmorency
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedical educationMedicineSample (material)The Internet

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives: The aim of this study was to find the interest in research among the undergraduate students of medical and dental colleges of Pakistan. Study Design: Cross-sectional study. Setting: Amongst the students of four medical institutes. Period: April to May 2018. Material & Methods: Sample size was 500 of undergraduate MBBS and BDS students from 1st year to final year. Participants were given a questionnaire and responses were analyzed with SPSS software version 21. Results: The mean age of participants was 23.24 +/- 1.85 years. Female students were more (63%) as compared to male students (37%). Seventy percent (70%) students were interested in different research work and more than 85% students were interested to continue their future career in academics. Participants were more interested in practical training as compared to research and theory. Most of the students were interested to carry out research in clinical field as compared to non-clinical field. The knowledge of research methodology was more in senior students. Student’s knowledge about “impact factor of journal” was low. Conclusion: In this research it has been found that a good number of participants were interested in research activities so measures should be taken to facilitate and motivate them by giving some sort of award to the researchers to increase the publications from Pakistan. Easy access to internet facilities must be provided to promote research activities. Efforts should be made to find out reasons why some students consider research less important. It is also need of the day to develop culture of research by senior faculty members of academic institutes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Incentives · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.996
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.396
GPT teacher head0.592
Teacher spread0.196 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designObservational
DomainIncentives
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

Citations2
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Professional Medical JournalSame topicHealth and Medical Research ImpactsFrench-language works237,207