Toward a wiki guide for obstetrics and gynecology trainees in Ireland
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The present paper describes the implementation of a novel, web-based, comprehensive national information hub for trainees in obstetrics and gynecology in Ireland. This was a unique development in the context of an entire medical specialty and was aligned with the communication strategy of the governing professional body. To date, trainee doctors working in Ireland undergo an incoherent and inconsistent new-staff induction and handover. In the healthcare setting, staff integration can have a major impact on the quality of patient care. METHODS: A free wiki software platform (PBworks) was used for the website, and freely available software (Google Analytics) was used to determine user interaction and level of engagement. RESULTS: In the first year, 442 user visits were recorded. The average duration of site visits was 4 minutes 39 seconds, which compared favorably with the 4-minute duration for visits to Wikipedia. CONCLUSION: The project was successful as a proof concept and in practice. Other medical faculties have expressed an interest in adopting the concept and developing it for their trainees. The concept is widely applicable to other countries, with the negligible cost relevant to resource-poor areas.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.065 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".