MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4391522042 · doi:10.1101/2024.02.02.24302186

Problem-based Learning Curriculum Disconnect on Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion

2024· preprint· en· W4391522042 on OpenAlexaff
Mario Brondani, G. Barlow, Shuwen Liu, Pavneet Kalsi, Annika Koonar, Jialin Chen, Peter J. Murphy, Jonathan M. Broadbent, Bruna Brondani

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2024
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicDental Education, Practice, Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInclusion (mineral)Equity (law)CurriculumContext (archaeology)Ethnic groupDiversity (politics)CensusPopulationGlobeMedicineFamily medicineMedical educationGerontologyPsychologyGeographyPolitical sciencePedagogyEnvironmental healthSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Background Diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) mission statements continue to be adopted by academic institutions in general, and by dental schools around the globe in particular. But DEI content seems to be under-developed in dental education. Objectives The objectives of this study were two-fold: to extract information from all the PBL cases at University of British Columbia’s Faculty of Dentistry curriculum in terms of the diversity, equity, and inclusion of patient and provider characteristics, context, and treatment outcomes; and; to compare these findings with the composition of the British Columbia census population, dental practice contextual factors, and the evidence on treatment outcomes within patient care. Methods Information from all the 58 PBL cases was extracted focusing on patient and provider characteristics (e.g., age, gender, ethnicity), context (e.g., type of insurance), and treatment outcomes (e.g., successful/unsuccessful). This information was compared with the available literature. Results From all the 58 PBL cases, 0.4% included non-straight patients, while at least 4% of BC residents self-identify as non-straight; there were no cases involving First Nations patients although they make up 6% of the British Columbia population. Less than 10% of the cases involved older adults who make up almost 20% of the population. Only Treatments involving patients without a disability were 5.74 times more likely to be successful compared to those involving patients with a disability ( p <0.05). Conclusions The characteristics of the patients, practice context, and treatment outcomes portrayed in the existing PBL cases seem to differ from what is known about the composition of the British Columbia population, treatment outcome success, and practice context; a curriculum disconnect seems to exist. The PBL cases should be revised to better represent the population within which most students will practice.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.026
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.026
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.104
GPT teacher head0.496
Teacher spread0.392 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxiv→Same topicDental Education, Practice, Research→French-language works237,207→