Experiences of Health Professional Students Delivering a Community-Outreach TeleheAlth Program for COVID Education and Health Promotion to Older Adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: To describe students' experiences as health coaches in a student-delivered Community Outreach teleheAlth program for COVID education and Health promotion (COACH). Methods: This qualitative description study collected data from student coaches (n = 19) who engaged in a 45-to-60-min semi-structured interview conducted via one-on-one on Zoom video-conferencing calls. Most (74%) student coaches were female with an average age of 25.6 years. Fifty-eight percent were from visible minority populations, and 42% administered COACH in suburban/rural areas. Coaches were located throughout British Columbia, Canada. Interview questions focused on students' experiences delivering COACH, their understanding of various health-related topics (eg, chronic care, virtual health, health promotion), and possible impacts on their beliefs and future practice. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analyzed thematically. Findings were reported in accordance with the Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research guidelines. Results: Three themes emerged from our analysis, including: (1) knowledge and skill acquisition for professional development; (2) appreciating relationship-based client-centered care; and (3) developing clinical interests and gaining clinical experiences. Conclusion: COACH supported the development of knowledge, skill, and confidence in medical school students in areas of health promotion, virtual care, and chronic disease management. Emerging themes were found to be representative of the six domains of the Canadian Medical Education Directors for Specialists (CanMEDS) framework (Theme 1: scholar and health advocate; Theme 2: professional and collaborator; Theme 3: leader and communicator). (ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT04492527).
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".