MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2166727592 · doi:10.1097/acm.0b013e3180305c10

Three Domains of Competency in Global Health Education: Recommendations for All Medical Students

2007· article· en· W2166727592 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Eric R. Houpt, Richard D. Pearson, Thomas L. Hall

Bibliographic record

VenueAcademic Medicine · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlobal Health and Surgery
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersLaboratório Central de Microscopia Eletrônica, Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina
KeywordsCurriculumGlobal healthMedical educationHealth careMedicineTropical medicinePopulationFamily medicinePublic healthNursingPolitical sciencePsychologyEnvironmental healthPedagogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the setting of world population growth and migration, global health issues have an increasing impact on domestic conditions and our medical practitioners. The authors ask: What exactly constitutes global health, and how much do U.S. and Canadian medical students or practitioners need to know about it? To address this topic, the authors convened an American Society for Tropical Medicine and Hygiene Committee on Medical Education, sought input from the Global Health Education Consortium, and surveyed members of the American Committee on Clinical Tropical Medicine and Travelers' Health for educational priorities within the tropical medicine field. The information gained from these sources has been distilled into three domains of global health competency that the authors propose each medical school curriculum should try to achieve for all students: global burden of disease, traveler's medicine, and immigrant health. The authors present here the rationale for altering curricula to include these three topics as a starting point for discussion among medical educators.

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)0.022
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.050
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.116

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0220.050
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0050.002
Science and technology studies0.0060.003
Scholarly communication0.0060.006
Open science0.0050.009
Research integrity0.0130.012
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.003

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.481
Teacher spread0.431 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations145
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAcademic MedicineSame topicGlobal Health and SurgeryFrench-language works237,207