Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Maintenance of Certification (MOC) Program administered by the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons applies to all Fellows of the Royal College including dermatologists. It is mandatory for those who wish to maintain their fellowship in the Royal College and can be critical for maintaining licensure requirements. Residents can take advantage of the program before becoming Fellows of the Royal College. Fellows and MOC Program participants in the Royal College MOC Program must complete a minimum of 400 credits during a 5-year cycle and a minimum of 40 credits in each year of the cycle. Credits are available for a wide range of CPD activities which the Royal College divides into three sections in its MOC Framework: Section 1, group learning; Section 2, self-learning; and Section 3, assessment. Many activities associated with involvement in Canadian Dermatology Association activities or involvement with the Journal of Cutaneous Medicine and Surgery (JCMS) are eligible for MOC Program credits. Failure to satisfactorily meet the requirements of the MOC Program in a 5-year cycle can result in loss of Fellowship in the Royal College.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".