MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

OSCE! Variations on a theme by Harden

2003· letter· en· W2113797612 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Education · 2003
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInnovations in Medical Education
Canadian institutionsThe Wilson CentreUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsObjective structured clinical examinationCompetence (human resources)Affect (linguistics)Medical educationPsychologyClinical PracticeHealth professionalsMedicineNursingSocial psychologyHealth carePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: In 1979, Harden described the first objective structured clinical examination (OSCE). Harden's OSCE dramatically changed the assessment of professional competence because it used actors and choreographed scenarios to evaluate the performance of professional behaviours. ANALYSIS: Because of the intense focus on performance, OSCEs have had a powerful influence on doctor training and practice. However, the immediate psychometric characteristics of OSCEs rather than their performance effects have been the subject of most research. CONCLUSION: The time has come to undertake a sophisticated sociological investigation of how OSCEs affect medical practice, including the ways in which they shape doctor interaction with patients, families and other health professionals.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesResearch integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.318 · 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