Introducing Evidence Based Orthodontics Journal Club Using A Structured Pre And Post Test
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: To evaluate the impact of introducing evidence based orthodontics journal club on the performance of postgraduate residents using a structured pre-test and post-test. Study Design and Setting: The comparitive cross sectional study was conducted among the orthodontic postgraduate residents (n=30) of third year and final year at the orthodontic department at de’Montmorency College of Dentistry, Lahore. Methodology: Present study was conducted among the orthodontic postgraduate residents (n=30) of third year and final year at the orthodontic department at de’Montmorency College of Dentistry, Lahore. Questions were extracted from the journal club articles. These questions were structured and used in journal club as pre-test and post-test during the academic year 2015-16 and comparison of the performance in the pre-test and post-test over the course of the year was done. Results: The results of pre-test showed a statistically significant increase during the academic year (p=0.031). Performance in the post-test also showed a statistically significant increase during the academic year (p=0.001). Conclusion: The redesigning of structured pre and post test in orthodontic journal club resulted in significant improvement in the performance of postgraduate orthodontic residents
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.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it