Que alterações de aprendizado tiveram os residentes de obstetrícia e ginecologia durante a COVID–19?
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic had a significant impact on medical education, including the training of residents, affecting in-person teaching and leading institutions to adopt distance learning methods. Objective: To evaluate the perception of residents in gynecology and obstetrics regarding the impact of the pandemic on their learning, identifying their safety when providing care and seeking to investigate whether residents would consider extending their residency. Methods: A questionnaire with closed questions and responses on a Likert scale was used, addressing different aspects of medical residency during the pandemic to meet the objectives. Results: Of the 71 residents, the majority were women (74.65%). Data analysis revealed that surgical practice was affected for the majority of them (85.92%), with the postponement of elective operations in gynecology (97.18%). Regarding practical learning, 42.25% considered it to be partially satisfactory, while 14.08% considered it unsatisfactory. In the theoretical field, residents’ perception was better, with 43.66% considering the learning satisfactory and 47.89% partially so. The pandemic partially affected medical residency for the majority of residents (85.92%), and alternatives were adopted to replace the lack of theoretical classes and practical activities. Conclusion: The pandemic had a negative effect on medical education and resident training. The interruption of face-to-face activities affected both practical and theoretical learning
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 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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it