MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2357515659

Outstanding Foreign Doctors of Introduction Modern Western Medicine of Dermatology and Venereology to China

2013· article· en· W2357515659 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
MA Cui-cui

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Chinese Journal of Dermatovenereology · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMedicine and Dermatology Studies History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVenereologyChinaGeorge (robot)MedicineLeprosyAdmirationFamily medicineClassicsHistoryArt historyLawDermatologyArtPolitical scienceLiterature
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective To review the development history of Chinese modern western dermatovenereology and retrospect foreign doctors who have made outstanding contribution to the performance. Methods Extensive retrieval historical literature, from1838 to 1950, were enrocced in 13 kinds of reference books were retrievaled to find out foreign doctors in medical activities. Results Many modern physicians of the United States of America, Britain United Kingdom, Canada, Germany, Republic of Austria, France, Republic of Italy, Japan, built clinics or hospitals for Chinese patients, set up many medical schools to train medical personnel. Chinese leprosy patients got free treatment in the leprosy hospital. Outstanding foreign doctors inclouds: John Glasgow Kerr, John Dudgeon, Dugald Christie, David Duncan Main, Philip Brunelleschi Cousland, James Boyd Neal, James Laidlaw Maxwell, Lee Sjoers Huizenga, George Gushue Taylor, Masao Ota, Leroy Francis Heimburger, Chester North Frazier, Frederick Reiss, Stephen Doulas Sturton, George Hatem, et al. Conclusion These foreign doctors were pioneers and founders of modern Chinese medicine Dermatology and Venereology. They are worthy of Chinese people's respect, admiration and miss forever. They are model of Chinese dermatologist.

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)0.002
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.054

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.001

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.261 · 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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Chinese Journal of DermatovenereologySame topicMedicine and Dermatology Studies HistoryFrench-language works237,207