MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2096609390 · doi:10.1192/pb.bp.107.017160

Mentoring scheme for child and adolescent psychiatry consultants in Scotland

2009· article· en· W2096609390 on OpenAlexaff
Michael van Beinum, Sandra Davies, Myra David

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychiatric Bulletin · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMentoring and Academic Development
Canadian institutionsSelkirk College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScheme (mathematics)Child and adolescent psychiatryPsychologyMedical educationMedicineNursingPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aims and Method To describe the mentoring scheme for consultant child psychiatrists in Scotland and discuss findings of a qualitative questionnaire survey of all eligible consultants' use and satisfaction with the scheme. Results All 21 respondents who had used the mentoring scheme thought it had been of great help. A third of respondents appointed since the start of the scheme had not used it. This could be because the consultants were not aware of the scheme, there were not enough mentors or mentoring was not included in consultants' job plans. Clinical Implications Formal mentoring is strongly recommended for all newly appointed consultants. Written recognition within job plans for both mentoring and being mentored would support mentoring arrangements.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.389
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.273 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsychiatric BulletinSame topicMentoring and Academic DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207