MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2095501868 · doi:10.1353/utq.0.0260

McGill Medicine (review)

2008· article· en· W2095501868 sur OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Delia Gavrus

Notice bibliographique

RevueUniversity of Toronto Quarterly · 2008
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueHistory of Medical Practice
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésPeriod (music)History of medicineHistoryClassicsMedicineGerontologyLibrary scienceArt

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Reviewed by: McGill Medicine Delia Gavrus Joseph Hanaway, Richard Cruess, and James Darragh. McGill Medicine. Volume 1885–1936 McGill-Queen's University Press. xix, 315. $60.00 Professor of neurology Joseph Hanaway, former McGill University dean of medicine Richard Cruess, and former associate dean James Darragh have written a sweeping history of one the most prestigious medical schools in Canada. The second volume covers the period 1885–1936, an eventful and uneven time in the history of the Faculty of Medicine at McGill University (the first volume was written by Hanaway and Cruess, and it dealt with the school's first half century, 1829–1885). The second volume first chronicles a period of expansion (1885–1901), in which increased student enrolment led to an increase in laboratory space and a doubling in the size of the Medical Building, followed by a period of evaluation and change that saw the rise of experimental medicine (1901–14). The authors argue persuasively that the 1910 Flexner Report on the state of medical education in the United States and Canada was not the primary stimulus for the changes that occurred at McGill. Rather, the work of Dean Francis Shepherd and his staff, as well as the financial help of several important benefactors, was the essential catalyst for this change. The Flexner Report with its stress on pre-clinical science education did, however, enable McGill to carry on a lack of emphasis on clinical training, a slight that continued until the interwar period. Help from the Rockefeller Foundation in the 1920s and 1930s, as well as the leadership of Dean Charles Martin, whom the authors describe as a decision maker and a good leader, resulted in many new developments, [End Page 291] such as the establishment of the Montreal Neurological Institute and the inauguration of the Osler Library. The latter part of the volume continues to chart the growth of various medical subjects (e.g., anatomy, pharmacology, neurosurgery, public health), but the treatment of some of these specialties feels rushed and incomplete. The volume concludes with a brief chapter on the governance of the medical faculty between 1885 and 1936. This book is an excellent source of information for those interested in the history of medical education in Canada. It is most useful as a reference book; the authors' good use of subheadings makes looking up specific information very easy. The helpful appendices include biographical sketches of the main individuals introduced in the book, as well as lists of officers of the McGill Faculty of Medicine and the Holmes and Wood gold medalists. The book does have, however, several weaknesses that leave more room for future work on this topic. Secondary sources are mined only for factual details, and the professional history of medicine literature is used very little, if at all. The main focus of this volume is on administration, on the contributions of individuals associated with the medical school (deans, physicians, university principals), and on the changing curriculum. There is little analysis, framework, or historical argument, and as such this book contributes little to historiography. Furthermore, the book sometimes feels burdened with unnecessary details (e.g., the list of when and whom Dean Francis Shepherd's children married). Despite these shortcomings, the three authors have produced a well-researched, informative, and much-needed history of a great Canadian medical school. Delia Gavrus Institute for the History and Philosophy of Science and Technology, University of Toronto Copyright © 2008 University of Toronto Press Incorporated

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 candidatesCharge 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: Autre · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,809
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,999

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 technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0100,000

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 Opus0,023
Tête enseignante GPT0,248
Écart entre enseignants0,225 · 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
GenreAutre

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

En bref

Citations0
Publié2008
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueUniversity of Toronto QuarterlyMême sujetHistory of Medical PracticeTravaux en français237 207