MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Design and Evaluation of Occupational Therapy Introductory Anatomy E‐Modules

2021· article· en· W3166783091 on OpenAlexaff
K. Lam Tin Cheung, Rebecca Timbeck, Michele Barbeau

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAnatomy and Medical Technology
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTest (biology)Occupational therapyTerminologyGuidelineMedical educationPsychologyComputer scienceMathematics educationMedicinePathologyPhysical therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction Occupational therapy is a graduate level program attracting students from diverse backgrounds, including those from non‐science fields. It is necessary for these students to understand anatomical structure‐function relationships and their impacts on occupational performance to effectively manage patients with complicated physical needs. However, anatomy is not a prerequisite for entry into the program at Western University and previously, many students struggled with basic anatomical concepts due to the diverse educational background. Therefore, this study aims to develop introductory learning modules that will prepare students for the more applied anatomical concepts discussed in the program. Methods Using Mayer's (2010) cognitive theory of multimedia learning as a guideline, four introductory anatomy e‐modules were developed to introduce novice students to basic anatomical terminology and systemic anatomy. A knowledge test was developed and distributed to first year students within the Master of Occupational Therapy program prior to the release of these e‐modules, and again a month after the completion of the modules. Subsequently, scores were compared to assess the effectiveness of the e‐modules at improving participant understanding of anatomy. In addition, an evaluation survey was distributed to examine learner's perceptions of beneficial multimedia design components within the e‐modules. Results Test results indicated significant improvement in student performance following the implementation of the introductory e‐modules (pre‐test: x̅ = 57.8%, post‐test: x̅ = 88.2%, p < 0.05). Furthermore, cluster analysis identified participants within the low performer group benefited the most from the e‐modules (Mean Difference = 43%, p < 0.05). Overall, relevant case studies and practice questions were identified by participants as components essential for enhancing the learning experience. Conclusion This study builds upon Mayer's theory of multimedia learning to develop e‐modules design features and subsequently identifies corresponding components that students perceive as useful for learning. Introductory modules were effective at improving student's understanding of basic anatomical concepts. Despite minimal prior anatomy experience, completion of the modules brings novice students to baseline knowledge level similar to those with more experience. Further research will examine the impact of module completion on student's performance in their anatomy course, with specific attention to those with no prior anatomy experience upon entry into the program.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.939
Threshold uncertainty score0.105

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.259 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB JournalSame topicAnatomy and Medical TechnologyFrench-language works237,207