Student satisfaction in clinical area subjects during the COVID-19 pandemic in a medical school
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction Coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 had an impact on health and education, among other subjects. It caused changes in teaching medicine. The objective of the study was to determine student satisfaction in the subjects of the clinical area in a medical school during the coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Methods The current study has an observational, descriptive, and cross-sectional design. The sample consisted of 119 students. Inclusion criteria included being a student enrolled in the 2021–2022 semester, between the VI and XII semesters in a medical school. Results It was found that the median age was 21 years; 68 (57.1%) were men. Overall student satisfaction was 67.1%. High student satisfaction was found in the dimension development of professional skills (84.9%), achievement of student expectations (69.7%), and virtual assistance (67.2%) at a medium level of student satisfaction. Flexibility in learning (64.7%), the use of infrastructure and facilities (61.7%), and the use of educational resources (61.3%) were reported. Discussion The students were generally satisfied with the dynamic communication of the teachers, especially concerning promoting student participation (79%).
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".