MétaCan
Menu
← Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2465147698

Room for two views : An experience

2001· article· en· W2465147698 sur OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
W Gutowski

Notice bibliographique

RevueCanadian Medical Association Journal · 2001
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineHealth Professions
ThématiqueChild and Adolescent Health
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicineDaughterNothingPediatricsFamily medicineLaw
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

In the eight years I spent as a missionary doctor in Nigeria, one of my goals was to train as many Nigerians as possible for medical work. One of my students was a 15-year-old pastor's daughter who gained some basic medical training at our mission hospital. She went on to midwifery training in the early 1970s, and then returned to work in the mission. My family returned to Canada in 1976, where I entered psychiatry. When we returned to Nigeria for a visit eight years later, this young woman, whom I will call Ruth, came to consult me. Her complaints were obvious to any physician: shortness of breath, ankle edema, coughing when lying down, low energy. She asked me to examine her; when I did so, I recognized a classical mitral regurgitation. She asked if medication would help. I told her that unless she had an opportunity to go to North America for valve replacement, nothing could be done. I advised her about general care, taking antimalarials to keep her hemoglobin up, vitamins and regular exercise. When I visited Nigeria again in 1995, Ruth was one of the first to greet me. She was very eager for me to listen to her heart. She described how she had gone back to nurses' training but had become increasingly short of breath. She spent one day in classes and the next two in bed to reduce the edema. She had become discouraged and depressed, to the point where she, a practising Christian and a pastor's daughter, went to consult the local witch doctor. He said that he would be glad to help her if she brought a goat and two chickens for sacrifice. Once back at home, she began to feel guilty about resorting to magic, and so did not return with the goat and chickens. The difficulty of furthering her education was becoming very stressful. She became more and more discouraged, to the point where she began to express a passive wish to be dead. During this time a friend and classmate invited her to attend a healing service. Ruth was not familiar with such things; she had grown up in a conservative evangelical church, whereas this healing service was charismatic. Ruth had no expectation of a miracle. Her concept of healing had more to do with the natural healing ability of the body. She would occasionally pray that God would allow the natural course of an illness to lead to recovery rather than taking a fatal turn. Her most expectant prayers were that God would give the doctor wisdom or the surgeon skill to help heal someone else. The service, as she later described it, was held in the open air, outside the church, which was too small to contain everyone who came for healing. After the general service the minister called people to the altar, according to their disease or sickness. People fell to the ground, as if unconscious, and were carried into the church. Ruth waited, but her own illness was not mentioned. She couldn't restrain herself for fear that the service would end before she was called. So she forced herself to the front of the crowd. And there she fell down, as she described it, “under the power of the Holy Spirit.” This was something she had never experienced before and did not understand. She returned home, confused, but feeling that in some way “something had happened.” She felt a little better, but not markedly so. In the next days she felt more improvement. She began to wonder what might have transpired in the healing service; and so she came to consult me, bringing her stethoscope to the only doctor who had listened to her heart before this strange event. It was with a mixture of anticipation and curiosity that I placed the stethoscope over her cardiac apex. What I heard made my mind tilt. Here was the clear lub-dub of normal heart valves. Yet just as clearly I remembered the distinct pathologic sounds I'd listened to over this same apex in 1984. Could this be the same Ruth? It was: this was a close-knit community where we had functioned as a large extended family. I had known her from the time she was a teenager. Her parents were our good friends. We attended the same church, played volleyball together, shared many meals. We had spent many hours teaching her the basics of medical science, microbiology, patient care. We had taught her how to give injections and to care for the very ill. This was Ruth, whose heart was diseased in 1984. How could her valves have reshaped themselves? I had never heard of a spontaneous resolution of post-rheumatic heart disease. She believed that it had happened during that healing service. I thought there must be some other explanation. Either that, or I must disbelieve my own ears. This disbelief seems ironic. There I was, a Christian who believes in the miracles of the Bible, who believes that God is “the same yesterday, today and forever,” finding it easier to believe what I had been taught in medical school than what I was hearing with my own ears. Science and miracles do not mix very well. We are taught in medical school that there are such things as “spontaneous remissions.” Perhaps we should be paying more attention to such remissions: they could be happening before our eyes without us even noticing. Certainly, our patients would report spontaneous remissions more often if we as a profession were open to listening, rather than bent on explaining such occurrences away. Our authority can make our patients look foolish and us appear wise. But at some point we must choose whether we prefer to believe the evidence of our senses or a cognitively created explanation for a miracle.

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 machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,013
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,026
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Qualitatif · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,051
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,171

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0130,026
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0020,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,001
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0340,014
Communication savante0,0150,017
Science ouverte0,0040,025
Intégrité de la recherche0,0100,033
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0510,011

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 Opus0,061
Tête enseignante GPT0,432
Écart entre enseignants0,371 · 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 source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeQualitatif
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

Citations0
Publié2001
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueCanadian Medical Association Journal→Même sujetChild and Adolescent Health→Travaux en français237 207→