MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2432718193 · doi:10.1097/acm.0b013e3182765491

Perspective

2012· article· en· W2432718193 on OpenAlexaff
Shannon E. MacDonald, Heather Sharpe, Keiko Shikako‐Thomas, Bodil Katrine Larsen, Lyndsay Jerusha MacKay

Bibliographic record

VenueAcademic Medicine · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHealth and Medical Research Impacts
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMentorshipAcademic institutionNegotiationInstitutionMedical educationCareer PathwaysPosition (finance)Perspective (graphical)Career developmentRelevance (law)Value (mathematics)PsychologyWork (physics)MedicinePublic relationsNursingSociologyManagementPolitical scienceBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The transition from trainee to career clinician-scientist can be a stressful and challenging time, particularly for those entering the less established role of nonphysician clinician-scientist. These individuals are typically PhD-prepared clinicians in the allied health professions, who have either a formal or informal joint appointment between a clinical institution and an academic or research institution. The often poorly defined boundaries and expectations of these developing roles can pose additional challenges for the trainee-to-career transition.It is important for these trainees to consider what they want and need in a position in order to be successful, productive, and fulfilled in both their professional and personal lives. It is also critical for potential employers, whether academic or clinical (or a combination of both), to be fully aware of the supports and tools necessary to recruit and retain new nonphysician clinician-scientists. Issues of relevance to the trainee and the employer include finding and negotiating a position; the importance of mentorship; the value of effective time management, particularly managing clinical and academic time commitments; and achieving work-life balance. Attention to these issues, by both the trainee and those in a position to hire them, will facilitate a smooth transition to the nonphysician clinician-scientist role and ultimately contribute to individual and organizational success.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.142
Threshold uncertainty score0.475

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1420.033

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 head0.306
GPT teacher head0.546
Teacher spread0.240 · 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
GenreCommentary

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

Citations7
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAcademic MedicineSame topicHealth and Medical Research ImpactsFrench-language works237,207