MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3210719759 · doi:10.1093/pch/pxab061.068

86 Virtual MacPeds: Leveling up to the new virtual reality of medical education

2021· article· en· W3210719759 on OpenAlexaff
Nina Mazze, Kristen Zahn, Anne Niec, Quang Ngo

Bibliographic record

VenuePaediatrics & Child Health · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInnovations in Medical Education
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityMcMaster Children's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCurriculumAsynchronous learningMedical educationDescriptive statisticsVirtual learning environmentMedicineComputer-assisted web interviewingCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Resource (disambiguation)PsychologyTeaching methodComputer scienceMathematics educationPedagogySynchronous learningCooperative learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Primary Subject area Medical Education Background The COVID-19 pandemic and physical distancing measures limited in-person learning experiences for resident postgraduate learners through mandated social distancing measures. Our training program responded by creating online synchronous and asynchronous learning opportunities to supplement learning and replace lost experiences. Virtual MacPeds is an online curriculum created using Kern’s six-step approach to curriculum development to supplement resident learning during COVID-19. The curriculum included online lectures, a live teaching calendar that includes links to sessions across rotations and subspecialties, and a resource rolodex with links to online learning materials. Objectives The purpose of this study is to evaluate the components of the Virtual MacPeds curriculum that were most useful to residents. Design/Methods Virtual MacPeds was piloted from March 2020 to June 2020 to 51 core pediatric residents in PGY1-4. The Kirkpatrick Model for learning evaluation was used to assess resident reaction to the implementation of the curriculum. A voluntary online survey was emailed to residents with the opportunity to respond from June to July 2020. Descriptive statistics were used to assess learner engagement and perception of the curriculum. Results Resident response rate was 38.2% (n=20, PGY1 =8, PGY2 =6, PGY3=5, PGY4=1). 95% of respondents had reduced in-person teaching sessions during COVID-19 and 80% had impacted clinical rotations (self-isolation, virtual care, patient volumes). Prior to Virtual MacPeds, 65% used online educational resources. 95% used the curriculum, all of whom found it helpful in fulfilling Royal College learning objectives. 85% of participants attended the online lectures - those who did not attend noted schedule conflict. 100% would use Virtual MacPeds in the future. Participants noted that Virtual MacPeds should include a live teaching schedule (100%), online lectures (84.2%), self-study modules (73.7%), resource rolodex (52.6%) with suggestions for recorded lectures (89.5%) and simulations (57.9%). Conclusion Virtual MacPeds is an acceptable and useful supplement to resident learning during COVID-19. Useful elements of the curriculum include online lectures, a live teaching schedule, resource rolodex and self-study modules.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.049

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.376
Teacher spread0.348 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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 venuePaediatrics & Child Health→Same topicInnovations in Medical Education→French-language works237,207→