MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3217483910

[An investigation of career choice, plans and expectations and practice preferences of male and female dental students]

2004· article· nl· W3217483910 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
M.T. Daalmans, Vissia, Anne Marie Kuijpers‐Jagtman, A.L.M. Lagro‐Janssen

Bibliographic record

VenueData Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) · 2004
Typearticle
Languagenl
FieldHealth Professions
TopicDental Education, Practice, Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuarter (Canadian coin)Dental practicePsychologyDental careFamily medicinePreferenceDental healthMedicineMedical educationDentistry
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aim of this study was to get more insight into the career choice, plans and expectations, and practice pattern preferences of male and female dental students in The Netherlands. A structured questionnaire was sent out to all 5th year dental students in The Netherlands in the academic year 2001/2002 (n = 258). The overall response was 65%. Both male and female students prefered working in a group practice environment rather than a solo practice, in which significant more males prefered ownership. Only 23% of the males and 7% of the females expected to work full time in the future. An important factor was leisure time, but for the female students 'taking care for children' was still decisive. The new job description 'oral physician' for the future dentist as advocated by Dutch health authorities was found less attractive than the present profession 'dentist'. Only a quarter of the females and half of the males is interested to serve as manager of a team of dental health professionals. It is concluded that male and female dental students differ in their plans and expectations with respect to their future career choices and practice pattern preferences. As the majority of the present dental students is female this will have a major impact on the dental profession.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.122
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.092
GPT teacher head0.439
Teacher spread0.347 · 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.

Study designObservational
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
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueData Archiving and Networked Services (DANS)Same topicDental Education, Practice, ResearchFrench-language works237,207