MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2752548759 · doi:10.1097/acm.0000000000001850

Artist’s Statement: Roger

2017· article· en· W2752548759 sur OpenAlexaffabout
Mark Gilbert

Notice bibliographique

RevueAcademic Medicine · 2017
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueEmpathy and Medical Education
Établissements canadiensDalhousie University
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésPortraitSilencePsychologyStatement (logic)WifeExhibitionVisual artsArtAestheticsPhilosophyLinguistics

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

I created the portrait Roger at the University of Nebraska Medical Center (UNMC) as part of a research study entitled Portraits of Care (POC) (2006–2008). Dr. Virginia Aita, associate professor at UNMC’s College of Public Health, and Dr. William Lydiatt, UNMC head and neck surgeon, invited me to draw and paint not only patients but also their caregivers. POC used portraiture to investigate ideas about care and caregiving. The study included 46 subjects, 26 patients, and 20 caregivers. With the help of these consenting participants, I created over 100 artworks in various media. Roger was being treated for amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS). I initially felt self-conscious when drawing Roger. The unforgiving nature of his disease meant that he was not only unable to speak but also lacking in the capacity for self-expression. Tension, however, dissipated once we started working on the drawings. By drawing Roger, I became more sensitive and attuned to his expressions. The silence we worked in was not an empty void, but a vessel for enhanced awareness and acknowledgment of each other’s presence. The intimacy and sensitivity engendered during our portrait sessions were even more profound without the convenience of easy verbal interaction. The way we related to one another, on either side of the easel, was as immediate, instantaneous, and constructive as any verbal interaction. The resultant images we made continue this “dialogue,” communicating the same silent focus within which they were created, with new audiences. In POC’s exhibition catalogue, Roger’s wife and caregiver, Dolores,1 described how their initial participation in POC was based on hope that the pictures would give an insight into the private aspects of living with ALS: Roger hoped that through the drawings of him, people would see the strength of the human spirit; that, despite the limitations of disease and disability patients can continue to contribute to society and inspire others to do the same. I witnessed Roger living with a grace that belied the physical and emotional challenges he faced. Our relationship was underpinned by the aesthetic interaction that permitted us to work together in the quest to create a portrait that allowed others to experience a fragment of his world. It was a huge privilege to be able to witness the poise and strength that emanated from Roger and Dolores. The interactions we shared were an enduring gift; they were generous, empowering, fascinating, and often profound. The portraiture process was instilled with an intimacy and power that was fundamental to the images created, the messages they conveyed, and the experiences they exemplified. Using portraiture as a research medium allowed us all to access the world of the subject, a world as distinct and ordinary as our own. Such insights “engage our own vulnerabilities, hopes, fears and dreams with theirs—and it is at this intersection that one is able to learn about care and caregiving.”2 POC attempted to seek universal meanings of illness and caregiving; the project asked, What happens to our understanding of the relationships between patients and caregivers, and our understanding of illness and care, when our method of connecting and understanding is informed by aesthetic sensibilities? Research findings showed that the POC exhibit facilitated viewers’ ability to acknowledge the potential for identity transformation, the centrality of the idea of mortality, the importance of empathy and compassion in care, and the presence of hope despite adversity.2 POC and other studies I have participated in suggest that portraiture in a medical setting may offer therapeutic benefits to patients and valuable applications for teaching topics related to the delivery of clinical care and the nature of doctor–patient interactions.3,4 In POC we created artworks that relied on reflexivity, community, aesthetics, and ethics to generate narratives and an aesthetic whole that seek not just to inform but also to inspire.RogerMark Gilbert, PhDM. Gilbert is a postdoctoral fellow, Medical Humanities (HEALS) Program, Division of Medical Education, Dalhousie University Faculty of Medicine, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada; e-mail: [email protected]

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)0,002
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,025
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
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 enseignants0,110
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,367

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0020,025
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,001
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0030,002
Communication savante0,0040,003
Science ouverte0,0020,003
Intégrité de la recherche0,0060,008
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,1100,046

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 Opus0,079
Tête enseignante GPT0,426
Écart entre enseignants0,347 · 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'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
Publié2017
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueAcademic MedicineMême sujetEmpathy and Medical EducationTravaux en français237 207