MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4378640429 · doi:10.2196/47394

Enhancing Learning About Epidemiological Data Analysis Using R for Graduate Students in Medical Fields With Jupyter Notebook: Classroom Action Research

2023· article· en· W4378640429 on OpenAlex

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Medical Education · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicStatistics Education and Methodologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematics educationGraduate studentsAction researchAction (physics)EpidemiologyMedical educationPsychologyComputer sciencePedagogyMedicinePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Graduate students in medical fields must learn about epidemiology and data analysis to conduct their research. R is a software environment used to develop and run packages for statistical analysis; it can be challenging for students to learn because of compatibility with their computers and problems with package installations. Jupyter Notebook was used to run R, which enhanced the graduate students' ability to learn epidemiological data analysis by providing an interactive and collaborative environment that allows for more efficient and effective learning. OBJECTIVE: This study collected class reflections from students and their lecturer in the class "Longitudinal Data Analysis Using R," identified problems that occurred, and illustrated how Jupyter Notebook can solve those problems. METHODS: The researcher analyzed issues encountered in the previous class and devised solutions using Jupyter Notebook. These solutions were then implemented and applied to a new group of students. Reflections from the students were regularly collected and documented in an electronic form. The comments were then thematically analyzed and compared to those of the prior cohort. RESULTS: Improvements that were identified included the ease of using Jupyter R for data analysis without needing to install packages, increased student questioning due to curiosity, and students having the ability to immediately use all code functions. After using Jupyter Notebook, the lecturer could stimulate interest more effectively and challenge students. Furthermore, they highlighted that students responded to questions. The student feedback shows that learning R with Jupyter Notebook was effective in stimulating their interest. Based on the feedback received, it can be inferred that using Jupyter Notebook to learn R is an effective approach for equipping students with an all-encompassing comprehension of longitudinal data analysis. CONCLUSIONS: The use of Jupyter Notebook can improve graduate students' learning experience for epidemiological data analysis by providing an interactive and collaborative environment that is not affected by compatibility issues with different operating systems and computers.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.092
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.402
Threshold uncertainty score0.915

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.092
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.680
GPT teacher head0.657
Teacher spread0.022 · 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