MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3121883136 · doi:10.1097/acm.0000000000003915

Adapting Compassion Education Through Technology-Enhanced Learning: An Exploratory Study

2021· article· en· W3121883136 on OpenAlexaffabout
Javeed Sukhera, J Poleksić

Bibliographic record

VenueAcademic Medicine · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMindfulness and Compassion Interventions
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCompassionCurriculumGrounded theoryMedical educationPsychologyInterprofessional educationHealth carePsychological interventionExploratory researchNursingMedicineQualitative researchPedagogySociologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Compassion is central to health care. Efforts to promote compassion through educational interventions for health professionals show promise, yet such education has not gained widespread dissemination. Adapting compassion education through technology-enhanced learning may provide an opportunity to enhance the scale and spread of compassion education. However, challenges are inherent in translating such curricula for online delivery. In this study, the authors explored how technology influences the delivery of compassion education for health professionals. METHOD: Using constructivist grounded theory methodology, the authors conducted semistructured interviews with 13 participants from across Ontario, Canada, from March to October 2019. The sample consisted of individuals who had experience with the design and evaluation of compassion education for health professionals. The interviews were coded and inductively analyzed to identify pertinent themes using constant comparative analysis. The study originated at the Schulich School of Medicine & Dentistry, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada. RESULTS: Participants provided a range of responses regarding technology and compassion education. While participants revealed concerns about the constraints of technology on human interaction, they also described technology as both inevitable and necessary for the delivery of future compassionate care curricula. Participants also shared ways in which technology may enhance compassion education for health professionals by increasing accessibility and learner comfort with vulnerability. Addressing technological ambivalence, improving facilitation, and maintaining a balance between face-to-face instruction and technology-enhanced learning were identified as elements that could advance compassion education into the future. CONCLUSIONS: Compassion education can be enhanced by technology; however, evidence-informed adaptation may require deliberate efforts to maintain some level of face-to-face interaction to ensure that technology does not erode human connection. Further research is required to address the uncertainties surrounding technology and compassion education as identified by participants. These findings provide educators with guidance for adapting compassionate care curricula into a digital domain.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.083
GPT teacher head0.422
Teacher spread0.339 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations7
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAcademic MedicineSame topicMindfulness and Compassion InterventionsFrench-language works237,207