MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409140512 · doi:10.36834/cmej.80123

How do medical students define a Health Promoting Learning Environments?

2025· article· en· W4409140512 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Rachel Joffe, Veronica Oczkowski, Diana Le, Melanie Lewis, Victor Do

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Medical Education Journal · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicSchool Health and Nursing Education
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Medical students in Canada report significantly higher rates of suicidal ideation, psychological stress, as well as mood and anxiety disorders, compared to age matched general population. We are still early in the process of having a comprehensive approach to learner wellbeing that centers around health promoting learning environments (HPLE) - focusing on more systemic actions as guided by the international Okanagan Charter. To move forward, we need to further understand what learners, faculty and staff view as critical components in an HPLE and explore how we can best advance efforts to create and embed HPLEs in medical education. The objectives of this study were to elucidate how medical students define an HPLE and what medical students perceive as the main barriers and facilitating factors to developing and fostering HPLEs. Methods: We undertook an exploratory qualitative study using virtual semi-structured interviews of how medical students define an HPLE and the facilitators and barriers of this. We used thematic analysis to review all transcripts with ongoing iterative analysis. Final themes were agreed on consensus. Results: We interviewed 14 medical students from all years at the University of Alberta. We identified four overarching themes which serve as important components of an HPLE including that HPLEs have foundational characteristics of respect, transparency, and open communication. Developing HPLEs require multi-pronged approaches that starts with ensuring basic needs are met and empowering learners to make health promoting choices. Learners identified that a culture of wellbeing is driven by wellbeing centered leadership. A safe space to take an active role in influencing their environment help learners thrive. Conclusions: Our study focused on elucidating medical student perspectives on factors that contribute to and foster a health promoting learning environment. Our findings can inform on systemic efforts to embed wellbeing into medical education in Canada.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.080
Threshold uncertainty score0.159

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.007
Scholarly communication0.0070.002
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.443
Teacher spread0.419 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Medical Education JournalSame topicSchool Health and Nursing EducationFrench-language works237,207