MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2139472159 · doi:10.1007/s40037-015-0208-6

The effectiveness of a new approach using movies in the training of medical students

2015· article· en· W2139472159 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Patrizia Zeppegno, Carla Gramaglia, A. Feggi, A. Lombardi, Eugenio Torre

Bibliographic record

VenuePerspectives on Medical Education · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicFilm in Education and Therapy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyDistressToronto Alexithymia ScaleScale (ratio)Clinical psychologyAlexithymiaCognitionAnxietyInterpersonal communicationIntervention (counseling)PsychiatryMedical educationMedicineSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: The use of movies in medical (particularly psychiatric) education has been often limited to portraits of mental illness and psychiatrists. The Psychiatric Institute of the Università del Piemonte Orientale has a longstanding tradition of working with/on movies according to a method developed by Eugenio Torre, using dynamic images as educational incitements. Our aim is to describe the preliminary results on the impact of this intervention in medical students. METHODS: The cinemeducation project lasted 6 months, and included 12 meetings. Forty randomly selected participants were assessed with: Attitudes Towards Psychiatry Scale (ATP-30), Social Distance Scale (SDS), Interpersonal Reactivity Index (IRI), and Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS), both at baseline and after 6 months, when the workshop was concluded. RESULTS: A significant increase was found in the ATP-30 score, and a reduction of the SDS and IRI-Personal Distress scale scores. CONCLUSIONS: Informal feedback from participants was strongly positive. Preliminary results from the assessment of participants are encouraging. Students' attitudes towards psychiatry and ability to tolerate anxiety when experiencing others' distress improved, while stigma decreased. The evocative power of movie dynamic images, developed in the group and integrated with the help of the group leader, can enrich students' knowledge, both from a cognitive and emotional standpoint.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.177
GPT teacher head0.555
Teacher spread0.378 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations29
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePerspectives on Medical EducationSame topicFilm in Education and TherapyFrench-language works237,207