MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Perceived Competence in NCTRC Job Domains among Therapeutic Recreation Interns during COVID-19

2022· article· en· W4293475714 on OpenAlexaff
Heather Bright, Lauren A. Cripps, Brent L. Hawkins, Sarah A. Moore, Laura McLachlin, Anne‐Marie Sullivan, Susan Purrington

Bibliographic record

VenueTherapeutic Recreation Journal · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicAthletic Training and Education
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of NewfoundlandDalhousie UniversityMohawk College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInternshipCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)RecreationCompetence (human resources)Medical educationPandemicPsychology2019-20 coronavirus outbreakSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)MedicineOutbreakSocial psychologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The COVID-19 pandemic caused many internships during the January 2020 semester to be shift ed to a virtual/remote format. Due to the unprecedented nature of this forced shift , there was minimal consistency in how virtual/remote internships were conducted. Using a cross-sectional design, this study aimed to summarize the experiences of RT/TR interns during the COVID-19 outbreak and assess their perceived competency in the NCTRC Job Task domains. A quantitative survey was developed for interns to self-assess their perceived competence in the ten domains. Interns reported being concerned about finishing their internship and graduating yet were satisfied with the amount of support received from their site and faculty supervisors. Interns perceived their highest competency in the areas of professional relationships and awareness and advocacy. Concerns are discussed regarding the inconsistent nature of remote internships during COVID-19, as well as implications for the profession and suggestions for future research in this area.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.110
GPT teacher head0.426
Teacher spread0.316 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTherapeutic Recreation JournalSame topicAthletic Training and EducationFrench-language works237,207