Initial and continuing education needs for the professional development of midwifery preceptors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Midwifery education in Québec, Canada, is delivered through a baccalaureate of midwifery. Its content consists of at least 50 % of practical supervised training, which is based on a one-on-one model. Each student is paired with an experienced midwife, called preceptor. Preceptors have been informally requesting some educational activities to improve their preceptorship. However, their professional development needs are not known, neither for their initial education nor their continuing education. In order to respond to their demand, a descriptive exploratory study was conducted with preceptors and preceptors-to-be. Data were collected during two focus groups of midwives. This study aims to initiate a systematic approach to describe midwifery preceptors' needs regarding their professional development. To achieve this, four objectives are pursued regarding the midwife preceptors: (a) Determine their initial education needs. (b) Determine their continuing education needs. (c) Determine the preferred delivery mode for initial and continuing education. (d) Determine the most appropriate timing for initial and continuing education. The results indicate that preceptors' needs are similar regarding the initial education needs and the continuing education needs. Participants emphasized the importance of being prepared in the pedagogy of practicums, the relationship with student midwives and what preceptorship encompasses. The preferred modes of delivery for professional development are in person for the initial education and through remote communication platform for the continuing education. The most appropriate timing for professional development activities is annually and just before starting a practicum with a student. The results will be used to develop a professional development program for midwife preceptors.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.040 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".