Changing Concepts of Neuroanatomy Teaching in Medical Education
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Anatomy teaching is often described as foundational in the education of physicians, but in recent years there has been increasing pressure on teachers of neuroanatomy to justify its place in the curriculum. SUMMARY: This article examines theoretical assumptions that have traditionally influenced the neuroanatomy curriculum and explains how evolution of thought in the field of medical education has led to a shift in how the pedagogy of neuroanatomy is conceptualized. CONCLUSIONS: The widespread adoption of competency-based education, the emphasis on outcome-based objectives, patient- and learner-centered approaches, and a renewed interest in humanistic aspects of medical education have all contributed to a changing educational milieu. These changes have led to a number of curricular innovations. However, questions remain as to what should be taught to medical learners, and how best to teach it.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it