MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1995903131 · doi:10.1097/acm.0b013e318033385d

PBL in the Undergraduate MD Program at McMaster University: Three Iterations in Three Decades

2007· review· en· W1995903131 on OpenAlex
Alan J. Neville, Geoff Norman

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAcademic Medicine · 2007
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInnovations in Medical Education
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityHamilton Health Sciences
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCurriculumCompetence (human resources)Medical educationCurriculum mappingMultidisciplinary approachProblem-based learningSyllabusCurriculum developmentMathematics educationComputer scienceMedicinePsychologyPedagogySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

When the undergraduate MD program of McMaster University admitted its first cohort of 20 students in 1969, it heralded a major change in medical school pedagogy that has influenced the education of medical students around the world. The three-year PBL curriculum, which emphasized small-group tutorials, self-directed learning, a minimal number of didactic presentations, and student evaluation that was based almost entirely on performance in the tutorial, represented a radical departure from traditional curricula. Since the inception of the original curriculum in 1969, there have been two major curriculum revisions, the most recent of which was in 2005. The original curriculum attempted to integrate both basic science and clinical science into the biomedical problems. The second iteration of the curriculum focused on priority health problems and centered on a list of common medical problems as the foundation for curriculum organization, on the basis that an understanding of the management of common conditions included areas of knowledge that would be essential for clinical competence. Under the third, current curriculum, the COMPASS (concept-oriented, multidisciplinary, problem-based, practice for transfer, simulations in clerkship, streaming) model was adopted. Under this concept-based system, emphasis is placed on underscoring the underlying concepts in the curriculum with a logical sequencing of both the concepts and the body systems. This article briefly reviews the history of the development of the undergraduate MD program at McMaster and the three curricula that have been developed during the past three decades.

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.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.963
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.134
GPT teacher head0.440
Teacher spread0.306 · 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