| Literature DB >> 36082057 |
Qi Han1, Chunhua Ma1, Ronghua Wang1, Chen Xu1.
Abstract
In order to explore the application effect of the Darongtong course model based on deep learning enhancement in nursing, a total of 500 students in the school are investigated. The students in the contrast set are given the traditional teaching mode, and the students in the research set are provided with a teaching method based on deep learning-enhanced Darongtong mode. The evaluation results, teaching quality, students' cognition of teaching effect and their satisfaction with teaching mode before and after teaching were compared between the two groups. From the experimental results, it can be seen that the application of Datong general teaching based on deep learning in school nursing students can not only deepen students' understanding of theoretical knowledge, improve clinical skills, cultivate students' nurse patient communication skills and clinical thinking, but also improve students' subjective initiative. It is clearly evident that the Darongtong course model based on deep learning enhancement in nursing can stimulate students' interest in learning, and improve their self-study ability and problem-solving ability effectively.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36082057 PMCID: PMC9436629 DOI: 10.1155/2022/5484423
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Contrast Media Mol Imaging ISSN: 1555-4309 Impact factor: 3.009
Figure 1Analysis of the total sample size of school students.
Figure 2Frequency of Acceptance Learning.
Contrast of the assessment scores and total scores of the two sets of students before and after teaching.
| Entry | Contrast set ( | Study set ( |
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Theoretical basis | Before teaching (points) | 11.23 ± 3.62 | 12.37 ± 2.86 | −0.605 | 0.558 |
| After teaching (points) | 16.50 ± 3.26∗ | 22.57 ± 3.36∗ | −3.307 | 0.008 | |
|
| |||||
| Clinical skills | Before teaching (points) | 12.56 ± 3.56 | 11.95 ± 2.21 | 0.357 | 0.729 |
| After teaching (points) | 15.86 ± 4.26∗ | 23.32 ± 3.65∗ | −3.507 | 0.009 | |
|
| |||||
| Case analysis | Before teaching (points) | 11.50 ± 3.02 | 11.69 ± 3.45 | −0.35 | 0.819 |
| After teaching (points) | 17.96 ± 3.17∗ | 22.89 ± 2.01∗ | −3.217 | 0.009 | |
|
| |||||
| Nursing analysis | Before teaching (points) | 10.57 ± 3.12 | 11.65 ± 3.39 | −0.574 | 0.579 |
| After teaching (points) | 18.93 ± 4.29∗ | 24.10 ± 2.16∗ | −2.637 | 0.05 | |
|
| |||||
| Overall result | Before teaching (points) | 45.50 ± 3.69 | 44.02 ± 3.87 | 0.563 | 0.586 |
| After teaching (points) | 79.26 ± 5.39∗ | 92.66 ± 6.52∗ | −3.88 | 0.003 | |
The evaluation effect of the two sets of students on the quality of this teaching.
| Set | Learning perception (points) | Perception of the teacher (points) | Teaching self-perception (points) | Awareness of the environment (points) | Social self-perception (points) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Contrast set ( | 30.26 ± 3.57 | 32.57 ± 4.21 | 24.57 ± 3.59 | 33.56 ± 4.36 | 32.59 ± 4.68 |
|
| |||||
| Study set ( | 45.50 ± 5.89 | 33.26 ± 5.50 | 40.26 ± 5.67 | 34.05 ± 4.53 | 33.57 ± 4.26 |
|
| |||||
|
| −5.331 | −0.501 | −5.727 | −0.191 | −0.379 |
|
| |||||
|
| <0.001 | 0.807 | <0.001 | 0.852 | 0.712 |
The degree of recognition of the two sets of regular trainees for the quality of the teaching effect.
| Set | Self-learningability | Nurse-patientcommunication skills | Team work | Clinicalthinking skills | Problem solving skills | Stimulate interest in learning | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yes | No | Yes | No | Yes | No | Yes | No | Yes | No | Yes | No | |
| Contrast set ( | 13 | 27 | 15 | 25 | 13 | 27 | 17 | 23 | 21 | 19 | 17 | 23 |
| Study set ( | 35 | 5 | 37 | 3 | 30 | 10 | 37 | 3 | 35 | 5 | 33 | 7 |
|
| 25.208 | 26.593 | 14.532 | 22.792 | 11.667 | 13.653 | ||||||
|
| <0.001 | <0.001 | <0.001 | <0.001 | 0.001 | 0.001 | ||||||
Contrast of the evaluation results of the objective structural clinical ability test by the two sets of students.
| Content | Contrast set ( | Study set ( |
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Contribute to a comprehensive grasp of theoretical knowledge | 15 | 37 | 26.593 | <0.001 |
| Broaden their knowledge | 13 | 30 | 14.532 | <0.001 |
| Contribute to knowledge application, making basic knowledge and clinical skills closely integrated | 12 | 37 | 32.916 | <0.001 |
| Improve independent learning ability | 11 | 36 | 32.237 | <0.001 |
| Exercise the ability to independently access literature and materials and hand over information | 12 | 37 | 32.916 | <0.001 |
| Improve analytical and problem-solving skills | 11 | 38 | 38.394 | <0.001 |
| Improve the ability of comprehensive analysis and logical thinking | 12 | 37 | 32.916 | <0.001 |
| Spirit of cooperation | 13 | 34 | 22.747 | <0.001 |
| Improve expressiveness | 11 | 32 | 22.175 | <0.001 |
| Learn to communicate effectively with others, including classmates, teachers, and patients | 14 | 35 | 23.226 | <0.001 |
Contrast of the satisfaction of the two sets of students with the teaching mode (n/%).
| Set | Very satisfied | Satisfy | Generally | Dissatisfied | Total satisfaction |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Contrast set ( | 10 | 7 | 4 | 21 | 19 (47.50) |
| Study set ( | 20 | 15 | 3 | 2 | 35 (87.50) |
|
| 14.587 | ||||
|
| <0.001 |