Dietetic Students’ Perceptions of Learning Professional Competencies with Four Simulations Throughout a Semester
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In nursing and medicine, taking part in simulation activities has been shown to be beneficial for students' learning; however, little has been documented in dietetics. This study aimed to document the perceived effect of 4 simulations on development of professional competencies by dietetic students. A mixed-method convergent approach was used with pre- and post-questionnaires, interviews, and a focus group discussion to look at dietetic students' perceptions of learning as part of a Nutrition Assessment course. Nonparametric tests for questionnaires and theme analysis for transcripts were used to examine data. After analysis, data were compared and merged for interpretation. Results showed that participants perceived a significant increase in comprehension of various competencies with simulations. In interviews and a focus group, a participant subgroup (n = 7) perceived an enriched understanding of some dietetic competencies compared with pre-simulations. Simulations seemed to have transformed classroom concepts to a more practical understanding of dietetic practice. More studies are needed to identify if these results could be replicated in different settings. Simulations had a positive effect on students' perception of competencies development and may be an andragogical tool of choice to support preparing future dietitians for entry to practice.
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 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 | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".