Bibliographic record
Abstract
T he CUA has taken a major initiative in establishing the Office of Education.This is an important step forward and offers an opportunity for enhanced medical education in a number of ways.• The office acts as a conference organizer.To this end, it plans and implements continuing medical education events.• As an accredited provider of continuing professional development activities for specialists, the CUA Office of Education provides advice and guidance to conference organizers who wish to put on a meeting that satisfies the criteria for section 1 (group learning event) and section 3 (self-assessment program) activities.These criteria, as defined by the Royal College, are quite rigorous, but achievable.The office can also organize activities for section 4 (structured learning projects, such as workshops and courses).A good example of section 4 is the recent Pediatric Laparoscopic Surgery course.An important benefit of the structure of the office is that, since meetings organized by the office are considered an extension of the association, federal and provincial taxes are not applicable to the management fees.This represents a significant cost savings for any member looking to put on a meeting.The office organized 4 accredited satellite symposia at the CUA Annual Meeting in Edmonton, sponsored by Merck Frosst, GlaxoSmithKline, Bayer HealthCare and sanofi-aventis.A highlight of the Office of Education was its recent symposium in Edmonton entitled "What the urologist needs to know about clinical trials: an overview," chaired by Dr. Luis Guerra.This popular symposium attracted over 100 participants.Feedback for all symposia were consistently positive.The office also organized 2 other meetings: the Canadian Senior Urology Residents program and a course on techniques in pediatric laparoscopic surgery, chaired by Dr.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.011 | 0.040 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.019 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.011 | 0.012 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.217 | 0.083 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".