SANTORIO SANTORIO - THE PIONEER OF EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In everyday clinical practice there is a constant need for valid information about diagnosis, prognosis, therapy and prevention of a variety of diseases. But there could be a disparity between the physician's diagnostic skills and his clinical judgment if he relies only on traditional sources of information. In the 1992, a group of scientists from the McMaster University in Ontario, Canada attempted to integrate individual clinical expertise with the best external evidence. They propose a process in which systematically finding, appraising and using of contemporaneous research were the base for proper clinical decision. They called this integration of personal clinical knowledge with research evidence - Evidence Based Medicine (EBM) and since then interest in this field has growing exponentially. But 400 years before this important concept emerged a young physician from Koper, named Santorio Santorio (1561 - 1636) argued that a doctor should first rely on sense experience, then on reasoning, and only lastly on authority. Beside his numerous medical inventions he was the first to search justification to his practice by using some vital connection between measured parameters and a person's health state. He could be therefore credited as one of the beginners of modern concepts of science or evidence based medicine.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.085 | 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".