MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2010845727 · doi:10.1353/pbm.2011.0000

Physicianship: Educating for Professionalism in the Post-Flexnarian Era

2011· article· en· W2010845727 on OpenAlexaffabout
J. Donald Boudreau, Sylvia R. Cruess, Richard L. Cruess

Bibliographic record

VenuePerspectives in biology and medicine · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInnovations in Medical Education
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedical educationMedicinePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although he did not write extensively about professionalism, Abraham Flexner clearly understood its critical role in medical practice. In discerning the basics of medical education he characterized scientific methodology as the instrumental minimum. He left open to future generations the task of defining its necessary complement, the "noble behaviors and fine feelings" required of the medical practitioner. Situated within the current professionalism movement, and informed by previous commentary on the enduring attributes of medicine, a curriculum based on "Physicianship"--the physician as healer and professional--can serve as a logical post-Flexnerian curriculum. The conceptual armature of Physicianship and the attributes necessary for the fulfillment of both the professional and healer role can assist in the selection of students and constitute the educational blueprint for medical teaching. The critically important concepts of identity formation and the requirements for the valid and reliable assessment of professional behaviors of students and faculty are essential components. A Physicianship curriculum, as conceived and deployed at the McGill University Faculty of Medicine, might resonate with Flexner.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.024
Scholarly communication0.0060.007
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0050.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.448
Teacher spread0.374 · 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
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

Citations38
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePerspectives in biology and medicineSame topicInnovations in Medical EducationFrench-language works237,207