MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1537677152 · doi:10.25011/cim.v33i1.11830

Establishing a <i>Trainee Section</i> in the CIM

2010· article· en· W1537677152 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Sagar B. Dugani, Stephan Ong Tone

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical and investigative medicine · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHealth and Medical Research Impacts
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMentorshipMedical educationCareer developmentMedicinePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Clinician Investigator Trainee Association of Canada – Association des cliniciens-chercheurs en formation du Canada (CITAC-ACCFC) is a national organization composed of MD+ trainees enrolled in MD/MSc, MD/PhD, and Clinician Investigator Programs (CIP) across Canada. In less than three years since its conception, CITAC-ACCFC has become an established organization with over 200 members from fifteen academic institutions. The mission of the CITAC-ACCFC is to organize and promote activities that support clinician investigator trainees in Canada, with the intention to improve academic and post-graduate career opportunities, expand institutional and public awareness of clinician investigator programs, and develop a nationally accessible information database of student and program development. The CITAC-ACCFC aims to improve the early-career conditions of clinician investigators in order to expand and advance innovative research initiatives within Canada. Throughout its development, CITAC-ACCFC has relied on the Canadian Society for Clinical Investigation (CSCI) for mentorship and guidance. In an exciting development, the relationship between CITAC-ACCFC and CSCI has enabled an innovative opportunity for early career development through a new collaboration- the creation of a Trainee Section in the Clinical and Investigative Medicine (CIM) journal. As a forum through which work on diverse topics can be shared with the global community, the CIM Trainee Section will create unique opportunities for professional development. Trainees in MD+ programs represent the next generation of clinical-investigators, who will integrate cutting edge research and compassionate patient care throughout their careers. Both professions require excellent communication skills, and through the Trainee Section, MD+ trainees, their supervisors, and MD+ Program Directors, will be able to focus on mentorship, academic training, financial planning, and career development, among other topics devoted to MD+ trainees. In addition to articles highlighting the research activities of trainees, the Trainee Section will feature clinical work, review articles, first chapter of theses, book reviews, and opinion pieces. This focus of the Trainee Section will complement CIM’s current focus on original research and issues of interest to the CSCI. It is therefore fitting to establish a Trainee Section that is dedicated to addressing issues arising at an earlier stage of training. As MD+ organizations are being established globally, the Trainee Section will strive to become an international forum that focuses on MD+ training. By increasing the international readership of CIM through the CITAC website, we will aim to engage MD+ trainees, program directors, university administration, and other leaders in education, to advocate for issues of national and global relevance. As trainees will be responsible for overseeing the editorial and peer-review process of the Trainee Section, we anticipate that this will provide an avenue by which to foster stronger interactions and collaborations among trainees on our Editorial Board, junior investigators, and senior faculty, while providing critical editorial experience for board members. Our team of Editors will ensure that articles are reviewed in a fair and timely manner, respecting the need to promptly publish articles of immediate relevance. We encourage all MD+ trainees to participate in the Trainee Section editorial and/or peer-review process. Additional details can be found on our website at: http://www.citac-accfc.org/portal/ As MD+ trainees, we are optimistic about the future of both basic science and clinical research. This is an exciting time to be an MD+ trainee, and we are confident that the creation of a Trainee Section will only augment this positive experience. We strongly encourage you to publish your work in the Trainee Section and become part of an emerging global community of MD+ trainees, who are keen on tackling health issues that affect us irrespective of our geographic, cultural, or racial borders. We look forward to receiving your articles.

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)0.041
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.039
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.219

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0410.039
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0090.003
Scholarly communication0.0080.005
Open science0.0040.017
Research integrity0.0060.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0440.027

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 head0.432
GPT teacher head0.483
Teacher spread0.051 · 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
GenreCommentary

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

Citations2
Published2010
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical and investigative medicineSame topicHealth and Medical Research ImpactsFrench-language works237,207