MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2535946540 · doi:10.5116/ijme.57f8.c1b4

Development, improvement and funding of the emergency medicine cases open-access podcast

2016· article· en· W2535946540 on OpenAlexaffabout
Lucas B. Chartier, Anton Helman

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Medical Education · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Media in Health Education
Canadian institutionsNorth York General HospitalUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMEDLINEMedical educationFamily medicineData scienceComputer sciencePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Internet-based medical education resources, such as podcasts, have increased in number and popularity in recent years, and are being integrated into all levels of medical training and continuing medical education.1,2 Podcasts may be more effective than traditional methods of instruction such as textbooks for learners who prefer auditory modes of learning.3 Social media, through which podcasts can be distributed, is defined as the social interaction among people through virtual communities. The term ‘Free Open-Access Medical EDucation' (FOAMed), coined in 2012, is a subset of social media relating to the “creation and exchange of user-generated [medical] content via virtual networks and communities”.4 It is growing rapidly, out of a desire by health care professionals for free medical education and as a means to stay current with the wide scope of EM literature.5,6 This article describes the creation of the Emergency Medicine Cases (EMC) podcast, as well as the innovative transformation that occurred as a result of its conversion to a free open-access resource and its partnership with an academic institution. Description of the Podcast EMC, which was created in 2010, is targeted at health care professionals working in the EM environment. In a monthly podcast, the host (ADH) poses clinical questions to guest experts, discussing current controversies and describing evidence-based treatments. Episodes cover broad-based and clinically relevant topics from atrial fibrillation to cognitive decision-making. Eighty-two three-hour podcasts have been produced to date, each accompanied by a written summary, and 46 five-minute ‘Best Case Ever’ capsules. Initially, EMC was offered on a subscription-only basis. As of March 2014, 1,680 health care providers had subscribed to EMC. As demand for free online education increased, however, a free open-access model was adopted in April 2014. To cover the significant ongoing costs of the program, EMC partnered in July 2014 with a non-profit academic institution in Toronto, Canada, dedicated to advancing the care of patients requiring emergency services. The social media presence of EMC was also increased.

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)0.024
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.838
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.024
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.243
GPT teacher head0.561
Teacher spread0.319 · 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.

Study designOther design
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

Citations10
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Medical EducationSame topicSocial Media in Health EducationFrench-language works237,207