A Time to Talk about Technology – Discussion about Medical Technology with the ATIME Group at The Ottawa Hospital
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT:In recent years, the use of technology in medicine has become increasingly common. Medical technology has the potential to introduce innovative solutions to clinical problems and supplement current methods of medical education. Advancements in Technology In Medical Education (ATIME) at The Ottawa Hospital is dedicated to discovering and sharing advances in technology with the medical community, as well as promoting the appreciation and use of technology in the next generation of physicians.RÉSUMÉ:Au cours des dernières années, l’utilisation de la technologie en médecine est devenue de plus en plus commune. La technologie médicale a le potentiel d’introduire des solutions innovatrices à des problèmes cliniques et de compléter les méthodes actuelles en éducation médicale. Advancements in Technology In Medical Education (ATIME) à L’Hôpital d’Ottawa est dédié à la découverte et au partage des progrès en technologie avec la communauté médicale, ainsi que voué à la promotion de l’appréciation et de l’utilisation de la technologie dans la prochaine génération de médecins.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 teacher head, 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".