MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Assessment of Graduate Orthodontic Programs in North America

2012· article· en· W2109153361 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
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 Dental Education · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicDental Education, Practice, Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGraduation (instrument)CurriculumEconomic shortageMedical educationAsian americansFamily medicineMedicinePsychologyGerontologyEthnic groupPolitical sciencePedagogyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study collected information on four main aspects of U.S. and Canadian orthodontic programs: demographic profiles of residents, requirements for graduation, graduate curriculum, and number of faculty and staff members. Program directors at seventy U.S. and Canadian orthodontic programs were invited to participate in a twenty-question survey and to distribute a ten-question survey to their residents. Twenty program directors and eighty-four residents completed the anonymous, online surveys on Qualtrics.com in July-August 2010. The average age of surveyed residents was 29.6 years of age; 73 percent were non-Hispanic white, with 14 percent Asian/Asian-American, 5 percent Hispanic, and 1 percent African American. A small percentage of residents (13 percent) were foreign-trained. The majority of residents (64 percent) were male. There was a wide variety of clinical and didactic requirements in the programs. Almost all programs emphasized treatment with functional appliances and clear aligners. An average of three full-time and ten part-time faculty members were dedicated to each residency program. This survey reveals a potential shortage of minority orthodontic residents currently being trained in orthodontic programs, in addition to several commonalities and differences among the programs' curricula, graduation requirements, and numbers of faculty and staff members. This preliminary survey will hopefully inspire measures to address the discrepancies revealed, particularly the lack of minority students and full-time faculty members.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score0.467

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.195
GPT teacher head0.557
Teacher spread0.362 · 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