MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2511054813 · doi:10.1080/14739879.2016.1219235

Lessons learned in global family medicine education from a Besrour Centre capacity-building workshop

2016· article· en· W2511054813 on OpenAlexaff
Clayton Dyck, Brent Kvern, Edith Wu, Ryan McKee, Lynda Redwood‐Campbell

Bibliographic record

VenueEducation for Primary Care · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlobal Health and Surgery
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContext (archaeology)DirectiveAdaptabilityMedical educationCapacity buildingPublic relationsPolitical scienceMedicineManagementComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

At a global level, institutions and governments with remarkably different cultures and contexts are rapidly developing family medicine centred health and training programmes. Institutions with established family medicine programmes are willing to lend expertise to these global partners but run the risk of imposing a postcolonial, directive approach when providing consultancy and educational assistance. Reflecting upon a series of capacity building workshops in family medicine developed by the Besrour Centre Faculty Development Working Group, this paper outlines approaches to the inevitable challenges that arise between healthcare professionals and educators of differing contexts when attempting to share experience and expertise. Lessons learned from the developers of these workshops are presented in the desire to help others offer truly collaborative, context-centred faculty development activities that help emerging programmes develop their own clinical and educational family medicine frameworks. Established partner relationships, adequate preparation and consultation, and adaptability and sensitivity to partner context appear to be particularly significant determinants for 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)0.038
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.199

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0380.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0130.008
Scholarly communication0.0090.006
Open science0.0040.019
Research integrity0.0080.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.002

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.316 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations2
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEducation for Primary CareSame topicGlobal Health and SurgeryFrench-language works237,207