MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

THE AMERICAN BOARD OF ANESTHESIOLOGY

2009· article· en· W2409986767 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Winston Owens, Francis P. Hughes

Bibliographic record

VenueAnesthesiology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac, Anesthesia and Surgical Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineLicensureSubspecialtyAnesthesiologyCertificateMedical educationCompetence (human resources)United States Medical Licensing ExaminationResidency trainingOral examinationContinuing educationFamily medicineMedical schoolAnesthesiaManagement

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The American Board of Anesthesiology (ABA) will administer examinations for recertification in the subspecialties of critical care medicine and pain medicine from October 30 to November 13, 2010 (except Sundays). The examinations will be administered via computer at more than 300 Prometric®, a part of the Thomson Corporation, Testing Centers located throughout the United States, Canada, and the U.S. Territories. The ABA will mail scheduling permits to candidates approximately three months prior to the exam.Physicians previously certified in critical care medicine or pain medicine by the ABA may apply to recertify in the subspecialty. After February 1, 2010, applicants may use the ABA Web site (www.theABA.org) to submit their application for a subspecialty recertification examination electronically. The standard application deadline is March 31, 2010. The ABA will consider late applications received by April 15, 2010. Applications received after the late deadline will not be considered. The ABA will make a decision about an applicant’s qualifications for subspecialty examination by May 15, 2010.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.138
Threshold uncertainty score0.462

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1380.097

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.268 · 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
GenreEditorial

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

Citations28
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnesthesiologySame topicCardiac, Anesthesia and Surgical OutcomesFrench-language works237,207