MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2128626339 · doi:10.36834/cmej.36652

Doctor-patient relationships, laws, clinical guidelines, best practices, evidence-based medicine, medical errors and patient safety

2013· article· en· W2128626339 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Claudio Violato

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Medical Education Journal · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMedical Malpractice and Liability Issues
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLawHippocratic OathLiabilityMantraMedicinePoliticsRemunerationPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Patient safety has now become a mantra of modern medical practice. Rules, laws, guidelines, evidence and best practices are frequently invoked to improve patient safety. These are not new; they have governed the practice of medicine since antiquity. A set of laws, known as the Code of Hammurabi (circa 1740 B.C.E.) have come down to us from the Babylonians after its namesake, the founder of the Babylonian empire.1 These 282 statues or common laws governed nearly all aspects of social, political, economic and professional life including those pertaining to physicians, surgeons, veterinarians, midwifes and wet nurses. Carefully conscribed details were devoted to specifying the relationship between patients and practitioners, including fees and penalties. Problems of “internal medicine” were dealt with physicians of the priestly class who saw to internal disorders caused by supernatural factors. The surgeon who dealt with physical problems, however, was accountable for both remuneration and liability to earthly courts. If a doctor performed surgery, generally with a bronze knife, and saved the life or eyesight of an upper class citizen, he was to be paid 10 shekels of silver. A similar outcome for a commoner was worth 5 shekels and only 2 shekels for a slave. If the outcome for the upper class citizen was bad (blindness or death), the doctor’s hand was amputated. If a slave died because of the surgery, the doctor had to provide a replacement but had to pay only half the value in silver if the slave was blinded. The Code provided further detail for many procedures including those of veterinarians (“doctor of an ox or ass”). Probably the most famous physician of all time and the founder of clinical medicine is Hippocrates (circa 460-360 B.C.E.) of Greek antiquity, the putative author of the Corpus Hippocraticum.2 Upon graduation from medical school, many modern physicians continue to take the Hippocratic Oath, the model of the ideal physician. Many historians question whether Hippocrates actually wrote this Oath or even the essays attributed to him. Some even question whether Hippocrates was a real person or was a composite created later by Greek and Roman scholars. Even in antiquity there were rules, policies, and regulations on how to behave as a physician. Next to Hippocrates, Galen is probably the next most famous physician in history. His works and texts continued to be studied by medical students and scholars for hundreds of years after his death. When Galen ventured to Rome in 161 A.D. he was met with hostility by the medical establishment. For five years he was able to remain to practice medicine, lecture and conduct public discussions under the protection of the powerful Emperor Marcus Aurelius who named him the “first of physicians and philosophers”.2 Eventually, Galen left to return to Greece complaining that he had been driven out of Rome by the medical establishment who saw him as an interloper. Galen did subsequently return to Rome honoring a request from Marcus Aurelius. He remained for the rest of his life.

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)0.041
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.123
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.218

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0410.123
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.007
Science and technology studies0.0050.034
Scholarly communication0.0130.012
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0150.013
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.002

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 head0.302
GPT teacher head0.535
Teacher spread0.233 · 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

Citations5
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Medical Education JournalSame topicMedical Malpractice and Liability IssuesFrench-language works237,207