MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4327546773 · doi:10.1080/0142159x.2023.2184235

Clinical support during COVID-19: An opportunity for service and learning? A cross-sectional survey of UK medical students

2023· article· en· W4327546773 on OpenAlexaff
Matthew H V Byrne, Jonathan C. M. Wan, Megan E. L. Brown, Anmol Arora, Anna Harvey, James Ashcroft, Andrew D. Clelland, Siena Hayes, Florence Kinder, Catherine Dominic, Aqua Asif, Rosie Freer, Arjun Lakhani, Samuel Pace, Nicholas Schindler, Cecilia Brassett, Bryan Burford, Gillian Vance, Rosemary Freer, Soham Bandyopadhyay, Rachel Allan, Laith Alexander, Vigneshwar Raj, Aleksander Dawidziuk, S Sravanam, Michal Kawka, Adam Vaughan, Oliver Devine, Jasper Mogg, Ailsa McKinlay, Aimee Wilkinson, Amy X Li, Beth Jones, Beth Selwyn, Dania Badran, Éabha Lynn, Eleanor Deane, Elif Gecer, Emily Murphy, Francis Beynon, Jane E. Harding, Khadeeja Mustafa, Lukschana Senathirajah, Malvika Subramaniam, Marina Politis, Martin Carr, Megan O’Doherty, Naomi Slater, Nicholas M. Kelly, O. Lee, Paaras Doshi, Rebecca S Bates, Robyn Spibey, Samantha Green, Simon Rey, Srishti Sarkar, Thomas Franchi, William Cambridge, Abu Sufian, Akosua Ofosu-Asiedu, B.J. Fox, Christopher Gilmartin, Eka Melson, Fatemeh Nokhbatolfoghahai, Filip Brzeszczyński, J. E. Jameson, Jessica Pieri, Nithesh Ranasinha, Sachin Ananth, Shamus Butt, Stephanie D’Costa, Ziyan Kassam

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Teacher · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInnovations in Medical Education
Canadian institutionsSt. Thomas Hospital
FundersNational Institute for Health and Care Research
KeywordsPreparednessMedical educationCurriculumService (business)Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Service-learningConceptual frameworkRelevance (law)MedicineVariety (cybernetics)PsychologyCross-sectional studyNursingPedagogyDiseasePolitical scienceSociologyBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose Medical students providing support to clinical teams during Covid-19 may have been an opportunity for service and learning. We aimed to understand why the reported educational impact has been mixed to inform future placements.Methods We conducted a cross-sectional survey of medical students at UK medical schools during the first Covid-19 ‘lockdown’ period in the UK (March–July 2020). Analysis was informed by the conceptual framework of service and learning.Results 1245 medical students from 37 UK medical schools responded. 57% of respondents provided clinical support across a variety of roles and reported benefits including increased preparedness for foundation year one compared to those who did not (p < 0.0001). However, not every individual’s experience was equal. For some, roles complemented the curriculum and provided opportunities for clinical skill development, reflection, and meaningful contribution to the health service. For others, the relevance of their role to their education was limited; these roles typically focused on service provision, with few opportunities to develop.Conclusion The conceptual framework of service and learning can help explain why student experiences have been heterogeneous. We highlight how this conceptual framework can be used to inform clinical placements in the future, in particular the risks, benefits, and structures.Practice pointsThere was a benefit for most students who provided clinical support compared to those who did not during Covid-19.Most students found clinical support roles more beneficial than clinical placements and most final years wanted their final year clinical placements replaced by a formal role within a clinical team.Not every student’s experience of clinical support was equal. The conceptual framework of service and learning can help explain this heterogeneity.The most beneficial roles for students complemented the curriculum and provided opportunities for clinical skill development, reflective practice, and meaningful contribution to the health service.There is an added benefit of combining service and learning if done correctly, and we can use this to inform the structure of clinical placements going forwards. However, there are risks, and we discuss principles of good practice and provide our own considerations.

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)0.010
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.182
GPT teacher head0.530
Teacher spread0.348 · 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

Citations7
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical TeacherSame topicInnovations in Medical EducationFrench-language works237,207