MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2134541962 · doi:10.3109/0142159x.2010.500709

Competency-based medical education in postgraduate medical education

2010· article· en· W2134541962 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 Teacher · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInnovations in Medical Education
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaRoyal College of Physicians and Surgeons of CanadaUniversity of TorontoMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFormative assessmentMedical educationProcess (computing)Work (physics)Professional developmentMedicinePsychologyComputer sciencePedagogyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the introduction of Tomorrow's Doctors in 1993, medical education began the transition from a time- and process-based system to a competency-based training framework. Implementing competency-based training in postgraduate medical education poses many challenges but ultimately requires a demonstration that the learner is truly competent to progress in training or to the next phase of a professional career. Making this transition requires change at virtually all levels of postgraduate training. Key components of this change include the development of valid and reliable assessment tools such as work-based assessment using direct observation, frequent formative feedback, and learner self-directed assessment; active involvement of the learner in the educational process; and intensive faculty development that addresses curricular design and the assessment of competency.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.052
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesResearch integrity
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.598
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.052
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0660.001

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.349 · 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