MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2058940572 · doi:10.3138/jvme.32.1.5

Mentors, Colleagues, and Successful Health Science Faculty: Lessons from the Field

2005· article· en· W2058940572 on OpenAlex
Jeffrey A. Morzinski

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Veterinary Medical Education · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMentoring and Academic Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersHealth Resources and Services Administration
KeywordsMedical educationInstitutionFaculty developmentField (mathematics)Academic institutionPsychologyProfessional developmentMedicineSociologyManagement

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Faculty members in medical and other professional schoolsare required to be fully functional soon after they beginemployment. Regardless of their experience, they areexpected to be productive in several areas related to clinicalservice and teaching. Most new faculty members are alsoexpected to engage in some form of research and to performleadership functions for their divisions, clinics, depart-ments, schools, and communities. These faculty roles andfunctions require significant skill levels that are expected tobe part of the new faculty member’s preparation.However, to be successful, new faculty also need tounderstand the social skills of their institution and theiracademic field. These skills involve much more than beingsociable. They include managing one’s career, finding andretaining productive colleagues, and understanding thenorms and values of academic medicine.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.588
Threshold uncertainty score0.858

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.105
GPT teacher head0.485
Teacher spread0.380 · 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