MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Learning

2015· article· en· W4241019417 on OpenAlex
Jan Gwyer, Laurita M. Hack

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
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 Physical Therapy Education · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicNursing Roles and Practices
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCurriculumPerspective (graphical)PsychologyMedical educationPreferenceMedicinePedagogyComputer scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

“The beautiful thing about learning is that no one can take it away from you.” —B.B. King As educators in physical therapy, we have many learning needs if we are to successfully provide the foundation for the future practice of physical therapy. As so often happens with JOPTE, this issue provides us opportunities for learning that can help meet these needs. Are you a classroom teacher seeking teaching methodology? Consider Greenberger and Dispensa's study of student preferences about using video podcasts to teach orthopaedic special tests. Student preference for short videos that can be downloaded to mobile devices indicates a potential trend in the future of instructional technology. Are you a classroom teacher seeking outcome methodology? Furze et al continue theirwork in clinical reasoning for physical therapist (PT) students with 2 papers that report on a tool for assessing clinical reasoning skills and the outcomes identified in a longitudinal study of students across their curriculum. The theoretical models proposed by these authors provide a next step in discovering a valid method of assessing the clinical reasoning of our students. Are you interested in the clinical education portion of the curriculum? Or perhaps in gaining a global perspective on physical therapist education? International discussions are emerging in North America and Europe concerning a strain in providing the resources needed for excellent clinical education. Hall et al confirm these concerns with a description of the barriers to supervising students in clinical practice in Canada. In studying over 3,000 Canadian physiotherapists, we now see international trends in countries with varied health care systems that point to similar stress points found in the United States, including clinical instructor feelings of stress and student preparation and attitudes. Are you responsible for admissions decisions? Fell et al pose a timely question regarding the need for prospective physical therapy students to have obtained a baccalaureate degree prior to commencing a professional physical therapy program. Are you thinking about curricular change? Two different articles offer information about potential changes in practice to identify if changes might be required in curriculum. Pignataro et al suggest that educators and clinicians alike should enhance their commitment to health promotion and patient education by performing tobacco cessation counseling with their patients. Van Zant et al studied the status and perception of genetics education in accredited PT education programs in the United States and found that faculty agree to some extent about the importance of genetics education, but do not see it as a priority. From a broader perspective, Cecilia Graham, the 2015 Cerasoli lecturer, suggests that a concept-based curriculum might be used to reduce the overall length of the didactic education for physical therapists. We are confident that much can be learned from this issue and we thank our authors for providing these opportunities!

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.846
Threshold uncertainty score0.220

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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.108
GPT teacher head0.518
Teacher spread0.410 · 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