MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396983504 · doi:10.69520/jipe.vi1.58

Paramedic Students' Experiences with Simulation-Based Learning

2022· article· en· W4396983504 on OpenAlexaffabout
Rick Jacobs

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of innovation in polytechnic education. · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSimulation-Based Education in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsNorthern Alberta Institute of Technology
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceMathematics educationPsychologyMedical educationMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Technically oriented industries demand job-ready skill sets from employees upon the immediate completion of their post-secondary studies. To meet these needs, many post-secondary institutions have mandated the incorporation of simulation-based learning (SBL) into curriculum, across a wide array of disciplines (Fang, Tan, Thwin, Tan, & Koh, 2011). The purpose of this research was to explore the experiences of three recent graduates of a paramedic program that had engaged in an ambulance simulator used in curriculum at a western Canadian post-secondary institution. An investigation examined how the design and associated physical interactions within an industrial simulation, facilitated in this post-secondary institution, affected learning outcomes and emotion responses of the research participants. Interview data gathered revealed differing personal experiences grouped into four categories associated with learning in SBL: realism, facilitation, learning outcomes, and personal responses. For SBL to be compelling to the learner, it must be realistic, facilitated by properly trained staff, and aligned with clearly established and valid learning outcomes capable of inducing physical and emotions responses. The incorporation of an ambulance simulator to augment a program already rich in SBL was an effective training tool for use in this mobile-healthcare application.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.304
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.362 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
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
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of innovation in polytechnic education.Same topicSimulation-Based Education in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207