A Proposed Curriculum for 5-years BDS Programme in Pakistan and its Comparison with the Curricula Suggested by PMDC and HEC
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Pakistan, whether to enforce a 4-year BDS course versus a 5-year course, is a matter of debate that warrants multiple deliberations. In USA and Canada, dentistry is 4-year long course but students can apply for admission into dental school only when they have already done 16 years of schooling (i.e. a 4-years of graduate university education is the pre-requisite). On the other hand, In UK & Ireland, students can apply for admission into dental colleges with 12-years of high school education. However, they follow a 5-years BDS programme. Similarly, there is much difference on the emphasis on various subjects taught in the dental programmes. This paper critically appraises the PMDC and HEC advised BDS curricula in Pakistan and suggests an alternative curriculum that is more balanced in terms of subject distribution, assessment and above all contemporary to cater the evolving needs of the dynamic discipline of dentistry. KEYWORDS: Dental; education; curriculum; Pakistan HOW TO CITE: Khan FR. A Proposed curriculum for 5-years BDS Programme in Pakistan and its comparison with the curricula suggested by PMDC and HEC. J Pak Dent Assoc 2020;29(4):169-171.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".