MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

End-of-Life Education Using the Dramatic Arts: The Wit Educational Initiative

2004· review· en· W2040460057 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Karl Lorenz, M. Jillisa Steckart, Kenneth Rosenfeld

Bibliographic record

VenueAcademic Medicine · 2004
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEmpathy and Medical Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThe artsMedical educationPsychologyGerontologyMedicineVisual artsArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Caring for dying persons requires skill in interpersonal aspects of care, which may be difficult to teach using conventional educational methods. The Pulitzer Prize-winning play Wit relates the personal story of a patient dying from metastatic ovarian cancer and describes the protagonist's experience with medical care from diagnosis to death. Members of the Department of Medicine at the VA Greater Los Angeles Health care System and the David Geffen School of Medicine, UCLA developed a program that utilized Wit to educate medical students, residents, and staff providers in the humanistic elements of end-of-life care. Between February 2000 and January 2002 the Wit Educational Initiative organized on-site readings of Wit by local professional theatre companies at medical centers throughout the United States and Canada, inviting medical students, housestaff, and other providers to attend the play followed by structured discussions of the play's themes. The Initiative provided extensive support for potential program sites including publicity, providing a handbook with a step-by-step guide to organizing local programs, and feedback of postperformance survey results. The Initiative was successful in organizing performances at 32 out of 54 (59%) medical centers where a local production of Wit was identified. Survey respondents confirmed the appeal, emotional impact, and perceived relevance of drama in end-of-life education. An educational program using theatre to educate trainees in the humanistic aspects of end-of-life care was enthusiastically received by medical schools and rated highly by attendees.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.198
GPT teacher head0.474
Teacher spread0.276 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations71
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAcademic MedicineSame topicEmpathy and Medical EducationFrench-language works237,207