MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2148863181 · doi:10.1080/01421590802108349

e-Learning in medical education Guide 32 Part 2: Technology, management and design

2008· article· en· W2148863181 on OpenAlexaff
Ken Masters, Rachel Ellaway

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Teacher · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicOnline and Blended Learning
Canadian institutionsNOSM University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMainstreamPortfolioE learningEngineering ethicsInformaticsEducational technologyLearning ManagementComputer sciencePsychologyKnowledge managementMathematics educationMedical educationPedagogyMedicineEngineeringPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With e-learning now part of the medical education mainstream, both educational and practical technical and informatics skills have become an essential part of the medical teacher's portfolio. The Guide is intended to help teachers develop their skills in working in the new online educational environments, and to ensure that they appreciate the wider changes and developments that accompany this 'information revolution'. The Guide is divided into two parts, of which this is the second. The first part introduced the basic concepts of e-learning, e-teaching, and e-assessment, the day-to-day issues of e-learning, looking both at theoretical concepts and practical implementation issues. This second part covers topics such as practical knowledge of the forms of technology used in e-learning, the behaviours of teachers and learners in online environments and the design of e-learning content and activities. It also deals with broader concepts of the politics and psychology of e-learning, as well as many of its ethical, legal and economical dimensions, and it ends with a review of emerging forms and directions in e-learning in medical education.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.067
Threshold uncertainty score0.223

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0670.041

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.318 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations192
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical TeacherSame topicOnline and Blended LearningFrench-language works237,207