La habilidad para el manejo de la información científica en estudiantes de Estomatología curso 2018-2019
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: in the article, the authors approach aspects related to the results of a cross-sectional descriptive study carried out with students of Odontology of the Matanzas University of Medical Sciences during the school year 2018-2019. Objective: the main purpose is to diagnose the development of the skill for the scientific information management in first and second year students of Odontology studies. Materials and methods: an intentional sample of first and second year students answered a questionnaire. Results: the students showeed greater control of the actions: consulting information sources, summarizing, setting out main ideas and using information resources. The less mastered action was the use of citations and references according to Vancouver standards. More than half of students perceived the received training as sufficient, nevertheless less than half of them have experience in developing scientific researches. There is thematic diversity in the bibliographic reviews carried out by the students and the main ways of disseminating the information are the term paper and the students’ scientific meeting. Conclusions: the students showed an appropriate control of the skill, according to the objectives stated in the Curriculum. Learning necessities associated to citations and references according to Vancouver standards and to using the scientific method were evidenced. It is necessary to generate educative actions contributing to enhance the students’ research experiences.
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 | 0.051 | 0.084 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".