Development of a Medical Humanities Program at Dalhousie University Faculty of Medicine, Nova Scotia, Canada, 1992-2003
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Medical Humanities Program at Dalhousie University Faculty of Medicine in Nova Scotia, Canada, was initiated in 1992 to incorporate the medical humanities into the learning and experiences of medical students. The goal of the program was to gain acceptance as an integral part of the medical school. The program assumed a broad concept of the medical humanities that includes medical history, literature, music, art, multiculturalism, philosophy, epistemology, theology, anthropology, professionalism, history of alternative therapies, writing, storytelling, health law, international medicine, and ethics. Phase I of the program has provided the same elective and research opportunities in the medical humanities that are available to the students in clinical and basic sciences, and has encouraged and legitimized the involvement of the humanities in the life and learning of the medical student through a wide array of programs and activities. Phase II will focus on further incorporation of the humanities into the curriculum. Phase III will be the development of a graduate program in medical humanities to train more faculty who will incorporate the humanities into their teaching and into the development of education programs.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.021 | 0.003 |
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".