MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400621815 · doi:10.22374/cjmrp.v12i1.95

Assessment of the Midwifery Education Program at the University of British Columbia – A Survey of Graduates and Midwife Mentors

2024· article· en· W4400621815 on OpenAlex
Cathryn Ellis

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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the 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

VenueCanadian Journal of Midwifery Research and Practice · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPrimary Care and Health Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMcMaster University
KeywordsNurse-MidwivesObstetricsMedical educationNursingMedicineSociologyPsychologyPregnancy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Midwifery Program at the University of British Columbia is the only academic centre for midwifery education in British Columbia. The program consists of arts and science courses, midwifery theoretical and clinical courses, problem-based learning tutorials, laboratory simulations, clinical experiences in community midwifery, and a semester of interprofessional placements in a local or global setting. As university based midwifery education is new to British Columbia, critical evaluation of the curriculum is essential. Between 2005 and 2010, we examined the curriculum annually from the perspective of new graduates (n=34) and their mentors (n=21) to inform curriculum renewal and development. Overall graduates felt well prepared for clinical practice after graduating, and highly valued their clinical placements. Both graduates and midwife mentors reported competence with most clinical skills, and senior midwives noted the graduates’ fluency with both the hospital and home setting. Need for improvement was noted with respect to suturing and venipuncture. There were some discrepancies in the assessment of competencies. While all graduates felt well or adequately prepared to recognize and manage when a normal birth changes to abnormal, not all mentor midwives agreed. Conversely, midwife mentors felt that graduates were prepared in the area of client communication and counseling, yet graduates felt less confident in this area. Over the years, the Midwifery Education curriculum has evolved to address feedback received via the yearly curriculum evaluation. The academic calendar has been modified to allow students and faculty more time for preparation, integration and reflection during the introductory year, to facilitate the consolidation phase in the core clinical courses, and to facilitate senior research projects. Courses on counseling, pharmacology for midwives, lactation consultation, global maternity care, and anatomy labs have been added to the curriculum. The program continues its effort to enhance theoretical and clinical teaching by offering regular preceptor workshops.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.330
Threshold uncertainty score0.983

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.158
GPT teacher head0.499
Teacher spread0.341 · 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