MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Charter on Medical Professionalism: Putting the Charter into Practice

2003· article· en· W2124004210 on OpenAlexaffabout
Richard L. Cruess, Sylvia L. Cruess

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Internal Medicine · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPrimary Care and Health Outcomes
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCharterMedicineHealth careLawLibrary sciencePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Letters20 May 2003Charter on Medical Professionalism: Putting the Charter into PracticeRichard L. Cruess, MD and Sylvia L. Cruess, MDRichard L. Cruess, MDCenter for Medical Education, McGill University; Montreal, Quebec H3G 1Y6, Canada (Cruess, Cruess)Search for more papers by this author and Sylvia L. Cruess, MDCenter for Medical Education, McGill University; Montreal, Quebec H3G 1Y6, Canada (Cruess, Cruess)Search for more papers by this authorAuthor, Article, and Disclosure Informationhttps://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-138-10-200305200-00020 SectionsAboutFull TextPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissions ShareFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail IN RESPONSE:Dr. Lyons has identified an essential element in the relationship between medicine and the society it serves. In the presence of a social contract, society has every right to expect that medicine will meet societal expectations under the contract, but medicine also can rightfully expect certain actions by the society it serves. The nature of the contract has changed dramatically over the past 150 years. Up until World War II, medicine largely determined public policy, controlled the health care marketplace, exercised great authority, and was given responsibility for the health care systems in the developed world. During the ...Reference1. Project Professionalism. Philadelphia: American Board of Internal Medicine; 1995. Google Scholar Author, Article, and Disclosure InformationAuthors: Richard L. Cruess, MD; Sylvia L. Cruess, MDAffiliations: Center for Medical Education, McGill University; Montreal, Quebec H3G 1Y6, Canada (Cruess, Cruess) PreviousarticleNextarticle Advertisement FiguresReferencesRelatedDetailsSee AlsoMedical Professionalism in the New Millennium: A Physician CharterCharter on Medical Professionalism: Putting the Charter into Practice Sadeq A. Quraishi and Ayesha N. Khalid Charter on Medical Professionalism: Putting the Charter into Practice Neil J. Smelser Charter on Medical Professionalism: Putting the Charter into Practice Charles M. Haskell Charter on Medical Professionalism: Putting the Charter into Practice Neil J. Smelser Charter on Medical Professionalism: Putting the Charter into Practice Donatella Lippi , GianFranco Gensini , and Andrea A. Conti Charter on Medical Professionalism: Putting the Charter into Practice Neil J. Smelser Charter on Medical Professionalism: Putting the Charter into Practice Jerome C. Arnett Jr. Charter on Medical Professionalism: Putting the Charter into Practice Sylvia L. Cruess and Richard L. Cruess Charter on Medical Professionalism: Putting the Charter into Practice Robert Feldman Charter on Medical Professionalism: Putting the Charter into Practice Walter J. McDonald Charter on Medical Professionalism: Putting the Charter into Practice Steven A. Wartman Charter on Medical Professionalism: Putting the Charter into Practice Jordan J. Cohen Charter on Medical Professionalism: Putting the Charter into Practice Yevgeniya Nusinovich Charter on Medical Professionalism: Putting the Charter into Practice Risa Lavizzo-Mourey Charter on Medical Professionalism: Putting the Charter into Practice Christopher J. Lyons Metrics Cited byPromoting Professionalism: Lessons from the Medical and Legal ProfessionsPretoria medical students' perspectives on the assessable attributes of professionalism 20 May 2003Volume 138, Issue 10Page: 851KeywordsHealth careHealth care policyHealth care sectorMedical educationMotivationPublic policy ePublished: 20 May 2003 Issue Published: 20 May 2003 Copyright & PermissionsCopyright © 2003 by American College of Physicians. All Rights Reserved.PDF downloadLoading ...

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.111
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.306
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.111
Threshold uncertainty score0.589

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1110.306
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0090.013
Scholarly communication0.0170.026
Open science0.0050.014
Research integrity0.0330.040
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0350.026

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 head0.158
GPT teacher head0.540
Teacher spread0.382 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations3
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of Internal MedicineSame topicPrimary Care and Health OutcomesFrench-language works237,207