MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4225263128 · doi:10.3138/jvme-2021-0144

Virtual Clinics: A Student-Led, Problem-Based Learning Approach to Supplement Veterinary Clinical Experiences

2022· article· en· W4225263128 on OpenAlex

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Veterinary Medical Education · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicProblem and Project Based Learning
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsActive listeningPaceMedical educationPeer mentoringFocus groupPresentation (obstetrics)PsychologyPeer learningVirtual learning environmentProblem-based learningVirtual patientMedicinePeer groupPerspective (graphical)PedagogyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The COVID-19 pandemic created an abrupt need for effective remote clinical experiences for senior clinical veterinary students. Subsequently, the authors created virtual clinics. This activity was derived from a problem-based learning (PBL) model wherein students designed clinical cases and participated through virtual role play as clients and clinicians. The purpose of this article is to describe virtual clinics and to report data from focus groups of participating students and faculty facilitators from two institutions regarding the positive and negative aspects of the shift in practice. A few common emerging themes included that case rounds were fun and engaging, students could learn at their own pace, and peer-to-peer learning opportunities had perceived value. Themes are reflected against the pedagogical literature to draw out areas that resonated. Students felt this activity was more engaging than listening to a discussion of a case they had no ownership of, and facilitators agreed that the peer-to-peer interactions added to student engagement. Additionally, students developed deeper knowledge about the underlying disease process and clinical presentation of their case, which required independent and self-directed learning, enabling students to think about a case from a client's perspective. By participating in these activities, students developed skills of classroom-to-clinic transitional value. While virtual clinics should not replace in-person clinical experiences, this activity might be useful to facilitate students' transition from a structured classroom setting to a less-structured clinical experience.

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 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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.794
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.105
GPT teacher head0.472
Teacher spread0.367 · 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