Visão de estudantes de medicina sobre os resultados da pandemia de Covid-19 no currículo paralelo
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Covid-19 pandemic has significantly impacted medical education, especially the parallel curriculum, which encompasses several extracurricular activities, such as academic leagues, internships, extension projects, undergraduate research projects, teaching assistance, and elective courses. This study aims at analyzing the result of the Covid-19 pandemic on the parallel curriculum from the perspective of medical students. This is an exploratory-descriptive, cross-sectional study, using an online questionnaire via Google Forms® with Likert-type scale questions. The sample consisted of 340 Medicine students, from the 4th to the 12th terms, from Curitiba, Paraná. The online modality facilitated the submission of scientific papers, as well as the accessibility to medical events, which had the highest adherence among the evaluated activities. Participation in scientific research stands out, especially for students in the basic/ clinical cycle. Therefore, most participants agree that there are adaptations to be maintained in the post-pandemic period.
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 | 0.012 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.005 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".