MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2462650591 · doi:10.4103/2249-4863.184615

Frequently asked questions about family medicine in India

2016· article· en· W2462650591 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Raman Kumar

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Family Medicine and Primary Care · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPrimary Care and Health Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMisinformationSpecialtyMedicineFamily medicineAlternative medicineSri lankaMedical educationPrimary careSouth asiaLawPathologySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Family medicine (FM) is an independent and distinct medical specialty in the developed countries such as USA, UK, Australia, and Canada since 1960s. FM teaching is imparted at undergraduate and postgraduate levels in countries such as Nepal, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka. Family practice is the practicing vocation of the majority doctors in India. The practitioners of FM include general practitioners, family physicians, FM specialists, and medical officers in the public sector. Medical students are largely unaware about FM career as this concept is not introduced at MBBS level. Faculty and senior doctors from other disciplines are also not able to answer the queries related to FM as they themselves also have gone through the same education system for last three decades, largely unexposed to the concept of academic family medicine. This article is a compilation of frequently asked questions, and their appropriate responses, presented here to dispel myths and misinformation about FM specialty. The answers are deliberated upon by Dr. Raman Kumar the founder president of the Academy of Family Physicians of India and the chief editor of the Journal of Family Medicine and Primary Care. This article was originally published as an interview in Docplexus, a popular online network and website for medical doctors in November 2015.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.315
Threshold uncertainty score0.699

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.080
GPT teacher head0.427
Teacher spread0.347 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations17
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Family Medicine and Primary CareSame topicPrimary Care and Health OutcomesFrench-language works237,207