Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective was to determine the extent of toxicology training in US and Canadian Medical Schools. The authors took a phone survey of the medical schools in the United States and Canada. Questions asked included whether school had a required toxicology course, in what context toxicology was taught, whether basic poison management was taught, and whether a doctoral toxicologist was on staff. Quantitation of hours of toxicology instruction and toxicology-related questions was also sought. Of the 142 medical schools in the United States and Canada, 123 schools were contacted (85.4%); 107 of these schools were US schools while 16 were Canadian medical schools. One hundred two schools (82.8%) stated that toxicology was taught in pharmacology or pathology courses, while only six schools (4.9%) had separate formal toxicology courses. An average of 5.04 hours (+/- 4.6 hours) of toxicology was taught in US courses, while the Canadian average was 6.04 hours (+/- 5.2 hours). Basic poison management was taught in 75 of the schools (61%), while a toxicologist (holding either an MD or PhD degree) was on staff in 56 of the 110 schools responding to this question (51%). While no relationship existed between having a toxicologist on staff and whether poison management was taught in US schools, a significant relationship was noted in Canadian schools (P less than .05). The authors conclude that toxicology as a separate discipline (and poison management in particular) is not routinely taught in medical school.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".