The intersubjective and the intrasubjective in the patient–physician dyad: implications for medical humanities education
Bibliographic record
Abstract
At the heart of medicine is the patient, and the fundamental relationship in medicine is the patient-physician dyad. Smith's argument for the intersubjective creation of knowledge, which is itself indebted to Bakhtin's notion of the utterance and of the necessity of "the other" in the development of meaning, enables an exploration of the creation of meaning during the patient-physician encounter. The analysis is enriched by Haraway's concepts of partial perspectives and of dispersion, which expose the many roles and voices in which the physician and patient may interact. This approach emphasises the use of the medical humanities as a tool to teach medical students about the ambiguities of clinical practice, in which there is often no "right answer" except what is appropriate for the individual patient.
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 | 0.019 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.058 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.020 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.016 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.000 |
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".