Nursing Students in Clinical Placements Learning in Dyads: A Feasibility Study Using a Non-Randomized Pilot Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: To develop a protocol for a clinical education intervention using dyads and to assess the feasibility of implementing the approach with second year nursing students in their first clinical placement. The objectives were: 1) to evaluate and refine data collection procedures and outcome measures, 2) to evaluate the acceptability and sustainability of the intervention, and 3) to identify weaknesses of the intervention or threats to future implementation. Methods: A feasibility study was designed as a non-randomized pilot trial. The setting was the university site of a collaborative Bachelor of Science in Nursing program in Ottawa, Ontario. Three clinical groups consisting of 24 second-year students enrolled in both the French and English undergraduate programs comprised the sample. The intervention protocol was developed based on guiding principles reflective of the needs of our institution, as well as pedagogical priorities. Data were collected from clinical instructors and other stakeholders pre- and post-intervention through multiple means and analyzed descriptively. We followed the CONSORT extension to randomized pilot and feasibility trials to guide reporting of the study. Results: The intervention was deemed acceptable by the clinical instructors, as well as the managers and educators of the units. We received no negative feedback regarding the intervention, or the workload required to implement the intervention properly. For data collection instruments, the NSSES was completed more often and with greater ease than the VSI-NS. In all cases, the responses to the instruments were congruent with our expectations and student scores shifted in the anticipated direction. Clinical instructors were able to consistently observe patient care and reported having more time for teaching and mentorship. Conclusions: Using a dyad approach to clinical education appears to be a viable strategy, and our feasibility study supports the appropriateness of further research into the use of dyads for nursing clinical education. From a sustainability perspective, the intervention allowed for the safe implementation of larger group sizes without negatively affecting the learning environment or the integrity of the course objectives. Résumé Objectif : Élaborer un protocole d’intervention en formation clinique qui utilise des dyades et évaluer la faisabilité de mettre en place l’approche avec des étudiantes en sciences infirmières de deuxième année lors de leur premier stage clinique. Les objectifs étaient : 1) d’évaluer et de peaufiner les procédures de collecte de données et les mesures de résultats; 2) d’évaluer l’acceptabilité et la viabilité de l’intervention; et, 3) d’identifier les faiblesses de l’intervention
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 | 0.074 | 0.056 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.002 |
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".