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
Complaints against doctorsCould be reduced by identifying and remedying poor communication skills early on Clinical communication skills are at the heart of medical practice, and poor performance is an important factor in the origins of complaints and litigation. 1 2 A recent study from Canada shows that poorly performing doctors can be identified early in their careers and possibly given targeted support and appropriate further training. 3 Tamblyn and colleagues followed up a cohort of newly qualified doctors in Ontario and Quebec for two to 12 years. 3They found a link between both communication and quality of care scores on the clinical skills examination of the Medical Council of Canada (taken shortly after graduation) and subsequent complaints registered with the medical regulatory authorities.A decrease of two standard deviations in communication score on the examination was associated with one additional complaint per 100 years of practice.People whose scores of communication skills were in the bottom quartile had a significantly increased risk of subsequent complaints from patients (excess complaint rate 2.15 per 100 practice years compared with the three other quartiles).Although the rate of complaints per 100 years might seem low, complaints were made against 17% of doctors at least once during the average 10 year follow-up period.Factors that were significantly associated with increased numbers of complaints were the clinician being male and working in family practice or surgery (rather than general medicine).Most of these doctors would have received training in communication skills during their medical school training, although this may have been of variable quality, and they were well aware of the content of the clinical skills examination.Considerable resources are currently devoted to teaching and assessing the communication skills of medical students.The Calgary Cambridge guide is well established as a generic guide to consultations and the skills needed for effective communication. 4 Students are often tested for communication skills-for example, taking a history; exploring the patient's perspective, concerns, and expectations; explaining diagnoses and treatment; and discussing options for treatment or care.Students also cover specific tasks such as breaking bad news.Tamblyn and colleagues' results suggest that doctors whose communication skills need to be improved could be identified before problems are encountered in clinical practice.Stricter thresholds for passing graduate medical examinations or postgraduate qualifications could be enforced.However, as these researchers point out, the reliability of many assessments of communication skills is low (and lower than assessments of clinical skills, for example), especially if relatively few
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 | 0.032 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.010 |
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