MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2025721924 · doi:10.1080/01421590701875147

The reincarnation of a biomedical researcher: from bench science to medical education

2008· article· en· W2025721924 on OpenAlexaff
James R. Brawer

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Teacher · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHealth and Medical Research Impacts
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMcGill Genome Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReincarnationMindsetScholarshipEngineering ethicsCareer PathwaysMedical educationField (mathematics)PsychologySociologyMedicineEpistemologyPolitical scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

After 33 years as a biomedical research scientist, I embarked on a new career in medical education. The transformation was awkward, difficult and exciting. Although I had assumed that previous experience in research and scholarship would stand me in good stead, such was hardly the case. I had to learn to navigate a strange new literature, replete with terms that I did not understand, and to deal with concepts that challenged my physico-chemical mindset. As I learned, I found myself discovering a field rich in essential questions, controversial hypotheses, and important potential applications. With my newly acquired knowledge and skills, I began to reflect on my own educational endeavors. I identified a number of outstanding issues and I designed studies to address them. What made these investigations particularly significant for me was their applicability. Although medical education is an exciting and meaningful career path, because of its low profile in most medical schools, few faculty are aware of the academic opportunities that it affords.

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)0.048
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.108
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.048
Threshold uncertainty score0.254

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0480.108
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0140.044
Scholarly communication0.0220.018
Open science0.0020.021
Research integrity0.0080.028
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.004

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 head0.159
GPT teacher head0.499
Teacher spread0.341 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations4
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical TeacherSame topicHealth and Medical Research ImpactsFrench-language works237,207