Supportive psychological intervention on psychological disorders in clinical medicine students with English Learning Difficulties
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This study aims to examine the effect of supportive psychological intervention (SPI) on psychological disorders (PD) in clinical medicine students (CMS) with English Learning Difficulties (ELD). METHODS: We will perform a comprehensive literature search from the following databases: Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Allied and Complementary Medicine Database, Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure. All databases will be performed from their inception to the present without language limitation by 2 independent reviewers. We will also look for grey literature, such as conference proceedings, dissertations or theses. Newcastle-Ottawa Scale will be used to assess study quality, and RevMan 5.3 software will be applied to carry out statistical analysis. RESULTS: This study will summarize the most recent evidence to assess the effect of SPI on PD in CMS with ELD. CONCLUSION: This study may provide helpful evidence of SPI on PD in CMS with ELD. OSF REGISTRATION NUMBER:: osf.io/tah2s.
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 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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".