The Interprofessional Rural Program of British Columbia (IRP<i>bc</i>)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Interprofessional Rural Program of British Columbia IRPbc was established in 2003 as an important first step for the Province of British Columbia, Canada, in creating a collaborative interprofessional education initiative that engages numerous communities, health authorities and post-secondary institutions in working toward a common goal. Designed to foster interprofessional education and promote rural recruitment of health professionals, the program places teams of students from a number of health professional programs into rural and remote British Columbia communities. In addition to meeting their discipline specific learning objectives, the student teams are provided with the opportunity to experience the challenges of rural life and practice and advance their interprofessional competence. To date, 62 students have participated in the program from nursing, social work, medicine, physical therapy, occupational therapy, pharmaceutical sciences, speech language pathology, audiology, laboratory technology, and counseling psychology. While not without numerous struggles and challenges, IRPbc has been successful in meeting the program mandate. It has also had a number of positive outcomes not anticipated at the time the program was established.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.020 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".