A mixed methods salutogenic exploration of dental and dental hygiene program learning environment and curriculum as perceived by students
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Little is known about the University of Manitoba dental (DMD) and dental hygiene (DipDH) students’ program experience and the health-of-self professional competency. This sequential exploratory mixed methods study explored students’ perceptions from a salutogenic perspective. Analysis of accreditation documents took place followed by four senior student focus groups (FG). Analysis of FG discussions involved Charmaz’s grounded theory process elements. Qualitative findings guided the survey development which included the Sense of Coherence-29 (SOC-29). Seven theoretical categories emerged from the FG analysis: realizing health-of-self; sensing program as health-promoting learning setting; experiencing health-of-self curriculum; programming structure; programming strategy; health-promoting people; and facilitating learning environment. Six significant relationships emerged between the programs. The DMD program predicted 8.4% of the variance for realizing health of self (DipDH composite score [CS] = 2.20, DMD CS=2.63, r = -0.29, p = 0.001) and 25.0% for the program structure about the patient booking system (DipDH CS = 1.67, DMD CS = 2.76; r = -0.50, p = 0.000). The DipDH program predicted 10.24% of the variance for experiencing a health-of-self curriculum (DipDH CS = 3.43, DMD CS = 2.84; r = 0.32, p = 0.000), 19.36% for program strategy regarding extending the curriculum (DipDH CS = 2.96, DMD CS = 1.77; r = 0.44, p = 0.000), and 6.25% for health-promoting program-based people (DipDH CS = 3.60, DMD CS = 3.09; r = 0.25, p = 0.005). Students perceived a lack of a health-of-self curriculum and little about the learning environment in support of the competency. The SOC-29 scores indicate a moderate SOC (r = -0.25, p=0.004) with DMD program mean of 127.37 SD = 19.08 and the DipDH program mean of 116.60 SD = 17.19. The study positions the DMD and DipDH programs to spearhead how program decision-makers might enable, mediate, advocate students’ health-of-self competency.
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 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".