DISTANCE LEARNING;
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: To determine the interest of residents of orthodontics in using distance learning and to determine their perceptions of learning experience. Study Design: A Cross-Sectional, Interventional Study. Period: From 1.1.2016 to 1.7.2017. Setting: Orthodontic department of de’Mont Dental College, Lahore. Methods: Present study was conducted on the orthodontic postgraduate trainees. Trainees were asked to read all given research studies before watching a recorded 1 hour interactive seminar. This was followed by participation in a discussion with specialist at the trainees’ institute. The trainees then filled questionnaire to measure the interest of postgraduate trainees of orthodontics in using distance learning and to determine their perceptions of learning experience. Results: Results of the study showed that trainee’s interest and perceptions were generally positive about distance learning experience. Statistically significant differences were found between trainee’s interest and perceptions based on how well they were prepared before involvement in this interactive distance learning session. Conclusion: The postgraduate trainees of orthodontics perceived distance learning to be effective, enjoyable and learn full.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.172 | 0.068 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".