MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W148280051

Dr. Frank W. Schofield: Veterinarian Extraordinaire

2008· article· en· W148280051 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Craig W. Wilkinson

Notice bibliographique

RevuePubMed Central · 2008
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueCanadian Identity and History
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésClassicsHistoryMedicine
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

In this short book, the author provides a synopsis of the life of a colorful and influential pioneer of veterinary medicine in Canada. Dr. Frank Schofield was typical of many young men of the British Empire in the early 1900’s. Schofield was from a relatively poor middle-class family, and after a somewhat difficult childhood, he saw Canada as a land of opportunity, so at the age of 17 he left his family in England and emigrated to Canada. He worked on a farm for a short time to save money and then enrolled at the Ontario Veterinary College (OVC). The hardships he endured as a student were intense, and force the reader to reflect on the comparative luxury that most modern veterinary students enjoy in Canada. Schofield overcame poverty and debilitating illness during his studies at the OVC and excelled scholastically, though his sickness left him partially disabled for life. He then joined the OVC faculty as a veterinary researcher and teacher. As a professor of bacteriology and pathology at the OVC, Frank Schofield was known as a brilliant and insightful researcher, and as a spellbinding orator and teacher. However, he also had the reputation of being intimidating and opinionated, and he was feared and disliked by some students and colleagues. The long list of Frank Schofield’s publications provided as an appendix to the book underscores his pioneering work in determining the etiology and pathology of many common syndromes and diseases. His work involved investigations of nutritional conditions and many bacterial and viral infections including clostridial diseases, salmonellosis, and bovine mastitis. An appendix in the book contains an excerpt from the first “Schofield Memorial Lecture” at the OVC, and outlines Schofield’s contribution to the elucidation of the etiology and pathology of mouldy sweet clover poisoning. The description of some of the experiments that he conducted and the challenges he faced in pursuing this research is fascinating. Schofield’s dedication to service and sacrifice on behalf of veterinary research and education extended to his personal faith and service of God through service to humanity. He was known locally for his kindness and generosity, but few colleagues know of his long-term contributions to development in Korea. Early in his career, after working at OVC for several years, he went to Korea to teach bacteriology at a medical college in Seoul. While there, he traveled throughout the country as a Christian missionary, preaching the Gospel and encouraging the Koreans in their struggle for independence from Japanese rule. Though he returned to Canada and back to OVC after only 4 years, Frank Schofield continued throughout his life to support Korean orphanages, the church, and the efforts of Koreans to gain national independence. After his retirement, he returned to Korea to continue this work, and late in his life he was recognized by the South Korean government with the country’s highest civilian honor. This book is light reading and will be enjoyed by many who are interested in either the history of the veterinary profession in Canada, or the roles veterinarians play in developing nations. Frank Schofield’s influence has been felt directly by many who were his students during the decades he was a professor at the OVC. To this day, many Canadian veterinarians have probably been indirectly influenced by him through professors who were taught and mentored by him decades ago. This book makes an important contribution toward helping Canadian veterinarians remember our heritage.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesÉtudes des sciences et des technologies, Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,275
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,001
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,025
Tête enseignante GPT0,226
Écart entre enseignants0,201 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations2
Publié2008
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revuePubMed CentralMême sujetCanadian Identity and HistoryTravaux en français237 207