Incorporating Sexual and Reproductive Health Care in the Medical Curriculum in Developing Countries
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Medical educators have a responsibility to train physicians and other health professionals in the core competencies needed to improve the sexual and reproductive health of their communities. Yet sexual and reproductive health care is significantly under-represented in the basic educational curriculum for medical and other health professionals, as well as in continuing medical education and professional development programmes for practising physicians and other health professionals. The Commonwealth Medical Association Trust is developing a model curriculum on sexual and reproductive health that can be integrated into undergraduate medical education and used with appropriate amendments for continuing medical education. This paper outlines topics for inclusion in the curriculum and three strategies for incorporating core components of sexual and reproductive health in the curriculum--by developing themes that can be integrated into the general curriculum in a multi-disciplinary fashion, adding free-standing modules as electives, and delegating cross-cutting issues such as gender issues and adolescent reproductive health to courses run by other departments. It argues for the use of problem-solving and case-based learning methodologies, as well as lectures, as the best way to teach health professionals how to provide information, counselling and support for sexual and reproductive health, as well as to cover the range of prevention and treatment needs of women and men seeking these services.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.017 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it