MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1966679534 · doi:10.1111/medu.12619

Equal, global, local: discourses in Taiwan's international medical graduate debate

2014· article· en· W1966679534 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ming‐Jung Ho, Kevin Shaw, Tzu‐Hung Liu, Jessie Norris, Yu‐Ting Chiu

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Education · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGlobal Health Workforce Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Science Council
KeywordsPolitical scienceMedical educationSociologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

CONTEXT: With the globalisation of medicine, the role of international medical graduates (IMGs) has expanded. Nonetheless, the experiences of native-born IMGs remain under-researched. In Taiwan, public controversy has unfolded around IMGs educated in Poland, calling into question the meaning(s) of equality in policy and medicine. In focusing on the return of IMGs to their countries of origin, this study adds to the growing literature concerning equality and globalisation in medical education. OBJECTIVES: The primary research aim was to analyse how stakeholders in the IMG debate use equality in their arguments. The authors set out to frame the dispute within the recent history of Taiwanese medical governance. An overarching objective was to contribute a critical, historical view of how discourses of globalisation and equality construct different policy approaches to international medical education. METHODS: The authors performed a critical discourse analysis of a public policy dispute in Taiwan, assembling an archive from online interactions, government reports and news articles. Coding focused on stakeholders' uses of equality to generate broader discourses. RESULTS: International and domestic Taiwanese students conceived of equality differently, referencing both 'equality of opportunity' and 'equality of outcome' within localisation and globalisation frameworks, respectively. The dominance of localisation discourse is reflected in hostile online rhetoric towards Poland-educated IMGs. CONCLUSIONS: Rhetorical disagreements over equality in medical education trace shifting state policies, from earlier attempts to remove barriers for IMGs to the present-day push to regulate IMGs for acculturation and quality assurance. The global Internet had a double-sided influence, facilitating both democratic political mobilization and the spread of hate speech. The policy debate in Taiwan mirrors discourses in Canada, where IMGs are likewise conceived either as globally competent physicians or as lacking in merit and technical competence. Future research could investigate the discursive formation and evidential basis of policies regulating international medical education.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.586
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.489
Teacher spread0.448 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations24
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical EducationSame topicGlobal Health Workforce IssuesFrench-language works237,207