MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

MP39-03 THE LEARNING STYLES OF GRADUATING CANADIAN UROLOGY RESIDENTS

2024· article· en· W4394808867 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
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

VenueThe Journal of Urology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLearning Styles and Cognitive Differences
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLearning stylesExperiential learningStyle (visual arts)PsychologyCurriculumMedical educationMedicineMathematics educationPedagogyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

You have accessJournal of UrologyEducation Research II (MP39)1 May 2024MP39-03 THE LEARNING STYLES OF GRADUATING CANADIAN UROLOGY RESIDENTS Nicolas Vanin Moreno and Naji J. Touma Nicolas Vanin MorenoNicolas Vanin Moreno and Naji J. ToumaNaji J. Touma View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1097/01.JU.0001008644.01945.6c.03AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: The Kolb learning theory attributes differences in learning to how an experience is perceived and processed. Subsequent learning style inventories were created with the latest version in the form of the validated Kolb's Experiential Learning Profile (KELP). Studied in other surgical disciplines, identifying the learning style of urology residents may help in the development of teaching curricula that are best suited to knowledge and skill acquisition. The objective of this study is to both characterize the learning styles of graduating Canadian urology residents and correlate individual styles with exam performance. METHODS: The KELP was administered to all graduating Canadian Urological residents attending QUEST between 2021-23. All participants received a report at the conclusion of the course. Participants' preferred learning phase (Acting, Thinking, Reflecting, Experiencing) and a specific learning style (Deciding, Analyzing, Thinking, Acting, Initiating, Balancing, Reflecting, Experiencing, Imagining) were identified for all residents. Individual exam performance was recorded for both written and OSCE components. Cumulative, OSCE, and written scores were analyzed between learning phase, and learning style, respectively (mean percentile score±SD; One-way ANOVA, Tukey's multiple comparisons test, α=0.05). RESULTS: Graduates from 2021 (n=35), 2022 (n=29), and 2023 (n=37) were included. The most common preferred learning phase were "Acting" (38/101, 37.6%) and "Thinking" (35/101, 34.7%). The most common preferred learning styles were "Deciding" (19/101, 18.8%), "Acting" (15/101, 14.9%), and "Analyzing", "Initiating" and "Thinking" (14/101, 13.9%, each). There was no significant difference between preferred learning phase and oral, written, or total exam performance (p>0.05). Graduates with the "Acting" (69.72%±4.25 SD) learning style performed significantly better than the "Analyzing" (59.33%±10.67 SD) learning style in the OSCE component (p=0.02). There was no difference between learning styles and written or overall scores (p>0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Graduating Canadian urology residents vary in their preferred learning styles, but the majority seem to learn by acting and thinking. There was evidence of better oral exam performance between a hands-on learning style compared to an analytic one, however increased test numbers may better elucidate the strength and relevance of this relationship. This lays the groundwork for future studies correlating learning style to exam performance and identifying predictors of successful completion of residency. Source of Funding: No source of funding to declare © 2024 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 211Issue 5SMay 2024Page: e652 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2024 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.Metrics Author Information Nicolas Vanin Moreno More articles by this author Naji J. Touma More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.537
Threshold uncertainty score0.993

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.292 · 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