Students’ appraisal of a preparedness model for the provision of oral health care during a pandemic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has impacted the provision of oral health care worldwide, prompting the discussion of preparedness. This study aimed to perform an initial appraisal of the usability, spatial representation, and clarity of a newly developed preparedness model from the perspective of senior undergraduate dental students at the University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada, enrolled in the 2020-21 academic year. Answers were analyzed thematically via an inductive coding process between March and June 2021. RESULTS: All the 111 students in years 3 (#55) and 4 (#56) appraised the preparedness model, generating more than 200 pages of text. Four main themes were identified across the essays: streamlined depiction, information-based approach, adaptability to an ever-changing situation, and room for improvement. Although the majority of students appraised the model as being useful in fostering information-seeking behaviour, few students disagreed with the model's portrayal and made further suggestions. CONCLUSIONS: Preparedness models can better guide oral health care providers during a health crisis such as a pandemic. The recently developed preparedness model was appraised as useful by senior undergraduate dental students, although alternative portrayals of the model were suggested. A comprehensive assessment of the newly developed model (and of its variations) is warranted to better support oral health care service delivery during a pandemic.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".