MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2057609859 · doi:10.1080/01421590400019542

Medical students’ perceptions of an undergraduate research elective

2004· article· en· W2057609859 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Teacher · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHealth and Medical Research Impacts
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedical educationPerceptionCurriculumMedical schoolPsychologyMedicineElective surgeryPedagogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent years have seen a steady decline in the number of new physician-investigators (Association of American Medical Colleges, 2000). To encourage medical students to select research careers, the Queen's University Faculty of Health Sciences curriculum includes a mandatory Critical Enquiry elective in the 2nd year. An anonymous written survey was administered to medical students before and after the elective to determine their perceptions of the value of the elective and its impact on their decision to pursue a career in medical research. There was a significant increase in the number of students expressing an interest in pursuing a research career following the elective (35-42%, p = 0.029). Students recognized other benefits including the development of critical appraisal, information literacy, and critical thinking skills; and the opportunity to select an area of and form contacts for postgraduate training. Even students who choose not to pursue careers in medical research perceive benefits to a mandatory undergraduate research elective.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.116
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.475
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.116
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.185
GPT teacher head0.557
Teacher spread0.372 · 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