MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1979442783 · doi:10.1093/ageing/afu077

Equipping tomorrow's doctors for the patients of today

2014· article· en· W1979442783 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Rachel Oakley, J. Pattinson, Sarah Goldberg, Laura Daunt, Rajvinder Samra, Tahir Masud, John Gladman, Adrian Blundell, Adam Gordon

Bibliographic record

VenueAge and Ageing · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInnovations in Medical Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCurriculumMedicineMedical educationGeriatricsPsychological interventionAsideHealth careWork (physics)NursingPsychologyPedagogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As the proportion of older patients with frailty presenting to health services increases, so does the need for doctors to be adequately trained to meet their needs. The presentations seen in such patients, the evidence-based models of care and skillsets required to deliver them are different than for younger patient groups-so specific training is required. Several research programmes have used detailed and explicit methods to establish evidence-based expert-validated curricula outlining learning outcomes for undergraduates in geriatric medicine-there is now broad-consensus on what newly qualified doctors need to know. There are, despite this, shortcomings in the teaching of undergraduates about geriatric medicine. National and international surveys from the UK, EU, USA, Canada, Austria and the Netherlands have all shown shortcomings in the content and amount of undergraduate teaching. Mechanisms to improve this situation, aside from specifying curricula, include developing academic departments and professorships in geriatric medicine, providing grants to develop teaching in geriatric medicine and developing novel teaching interventions to make the best of existing resources. Under the last of these headings, innovations have been shown to improve outcomes by: using technology to ensure the most effective allocation of teaching time and resources; using inter-professional education as a means of improving attitudes towards care of older patients; focusing teaching specifically on attitudes towards older patients and those who work with them; and trying to engage patients in teaching. Research areas going forward include how to incentivise medical schools to deliver specified curricula, how to choose from an ever-expanding array of teaching technologies, how to implement interprofessional education in a sustainable way and how to design teaching interventions using a qualitative understanding of attitudes towards older patients and the teams that care for them.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.026
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.126

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.026
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0020.010
Research integrity0.0050.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0380.012

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.281 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations43
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAge and AgeingSame topicInnovations in Medical EducationFrench-language works237,207