The High Clinic: a pilot project of a new model for an outpatient, community-based teaching clinic in rheumatology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objectives were to develop an outpatient, community-based clinical education experience for second-year rheumatology fellows based on sound education principles, and to pilot the program to test its practicability and assess student perception of its educational efficacy. The outpatient clinical education experience consisted of four steps. In Step 1 second-year rheumatology fellows assessed patients and reviewed their cases with two supervisors. Step 2 entailed each fellow presenting a brief summary of each case to their colleagues and supervisors for discussion and analysis of learning issues. In Step 3 each fellow conducted a literature search of the learning issues identified in Step 2. Step 4 occurred in the days following the clinic and entailed a seminar discussion of the literature search results with fellow colleagues. At the end of this outpatient clinical education program, questionnaires were given to participating fellows to assess its effectiveness. All participants judged this new clinical education program to be practical and effective; outcomes were positive for all skills specified as objectives for the clinic. This model of outpatient community-based clinical teaching, named 'The High Clinic' is a new and effective model for a teaching clinic in rheumatology, featuring augmented patient exposure, increased interactions with supervisors and a case-based learning. The pilot test of the clinic was implemented successfully. Participants in the clinic were satisfied with their achievement of stated objectives. This model is applicable to other specialties.
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 | 0.013 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
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".