MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2072473102 · doi:10.2147/jmdh.s35792

Mentoring in biostatistics: some suggestions for reform

2012· article· en· W2072473102 on OpenAlex
Lehana Thabane

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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMentoring and Academic Development
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversitySt. Joseph’s Healthcare Hamilton
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsBiostatisticsMedical educationPsychologyProfessional developmentComputer scienceMedicineNursingPublic health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mentoring is routinely used as a tool to facilitate acquisition of skills by new professionals in fields like medicine, nursing, surgery, and business. While mentoring has been proposed as an effective strategy for knowledge and skills transfer in biostatistics and related fields, there is still much to be done to facilitate adoption by stakeholders, including academia and employers of biostatisticians. This is especially troubling given that biostatisticians play a key role in the success or otherwise of clinical research conducted for evidence-based decisions. In this paper, we offer suggestions on how mentoring can be applied in practice to advance the statistical training of future biostatisticians. In particular, we propose steps that academic statistics departments, professional statistical societies, and statistics organizations can take to advance the mentoring of young biostatisticians. Our suggestions also cover what mentors and mentees can do to facilitate a successful mentoring relationship.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.202
Threshold uncertainty score0.461

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.416
Teacher spread0.345 · 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