MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1196724132

Neonatal Ethics Teaching Program - Problem Based Learning in Ethics (PBLE): Critically Ill Newborn in the NICU

2013· article· en· W1196724132 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Gregory P. Moore, Emanuela Ferretti, Thierry Daboval

Bibliographic record

VenueuO Research (University of Ottawa) · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEthics and Legal Issues in Pediatric Healthcare
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCritically illEngineering ethicsMedicineIntensive care medicineEngineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A PBLE is a teaching tool that imparts knowledge on some of the competencies of the Neonatal Ethics Teaching Program that the NICU fellows are expected to acquire before completing their Neonatal-Perinatal Medicine training at the University of Ottawa. Furthermore, a PBLE provides trainees the opportunity to practice and learn how they would interact with a true patient in a given clinical scenario. This helps trainees improve their communication skills and application of ethical principles when they have to interact with parents in delicate, difficult, and ethically charged situations regarding either their unborn or born child. Trainees are encouraged to refer to a procedural form that outlines the steps they should follow during a one on one medical encounter and use the standardized patient as a teaching tool. This PBLE is specific to the critically ill newborn in the NICU scenario where trainees are taught to distinguish the three parent rationales behind the question: “If my baby was yours, what would you do?” and explain the appropriate response to the parent question: “Have you done everything you can for my baby?”

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.003

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.114
GPT teacher head0.432
Teacher spread0.317 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueuO Research (University of Ottawa)→Same topicEthics and Legal Issues in Pediatric Healthcare→French-language works237,207→