Dental students’ perspective on learning activities regarding professionalism. A meta ethnographic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Present literature on professionalism usually focuses on individual parts of professional identity development and mostly, as these are seen and are evaluated by the dental educators. When looking at professionalism and in particular professional identity formation, It is extremely important to listen to the voice of the students regarding their thoughts, attitudes, beliefs and ideas about how to become ethical, compassionate, and culturally competent oral health professionals. The aim of this meta-ethnographic review was therefore to explore students' perspective on learning activities regarding professionalism. Methods: A review of the literature was conducted following the PRISMA guidelines to identify qualitative studies on professionalism teaching, focusing on dental students, covering from 2010 up to May 2024. Critical appraisal of the articles was conducted by 2 researchers using the Joana Briggs Institute and the McGill Mixed Methods Appraisal Tools. We then applied the meta-ethnographic methodology defining our aim, and proceeding with in depth reading, relating and translating of first and second order point of views before drawing our own salient themes. Results: From the initial 6,995 studies, 11 were included in the analysis. The studies represented 6 different countries, 8 were of high and 3 of moderate quality. A conceptual preliminary matrix was developed based on the first reading and then used to compare quotations from the different studies. The overall themes in the conceptual model were phrased "Intentionality" and "Learning Context". The analysis of the quotations from the informants (first order) and the researchers (second order) yielded five sub-themes: changed self-awareness, perseverance, safe learning environment, authenticity, and shifting perspective. Discussion: Dental educators should understand the students' perspective and needs for professional identity formation and understand their own position as role models towards this direction. Dental education should be a safe learning environment where multiple stimuli provided together with reflection and exchange of thoughts guided by educators, enhance development of students' professional behaviour.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".