Using GastroPlus to teach complex biopharmaceutical concepts
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Context: In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, many educational adjustments had to be made to move in-person teaching to online classrooms. This report showcases the use of the software GastroPlus in an undergraduate-level pharmacy course. Programme description: This course aimed for the students to learn how to perform a mechanistically based simulation to predict the oral absorption pattern, pharmacokinetics, and biopharmaceutics properties of compounds in humans. The computer simulation offered the opportunity to teach concepts about bioavailability providing all kinds of experience with major biopharmaceutic determinants that affect systemic drug exposure. Evaluation: The advantage of this approach was seen by the enhanced performance on the biopharmaceutics questions on the final exam compared with the previous year where the laboratory was not implemented: An increase from 2019 (where no laboratory was implemented) through 2021 incorrect scores from 52, 76 to 75%, respectively. Conclusion: There is great benefit in using computer programs and simulations as a technique to enhance active learning and to educate pharmacy students in salient aspects of biopharmaceutics.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.049 | 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 it