MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2740291495 · doi:10.1002/jum.14333

Ultrasound Curricula in Undergraduate Medical Education: A Scoping Review

2017· review· en· W2740291495 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Ultrasound in Medicine · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUltrasound in Clinical Applications
Canadian institutionsSt. Michael's HospitalThe Wilson CentreUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineEnthusiasmCurriculumPoint of care ultrasoundMedical educationUndergraduate educationPoint of careNursingPedagogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The clinical applications of point-of-care ultrasound (US) have expanded rapidly over the past decade. To promote early exposure to point-of-care US, there is widespread support for the integration of US curricula within undergraduate medical education. However, despite growing evidence and enthusiasm for point-of-care US education in undergraduate medical education, the curricular design and delivery across undergraduate medical education programs remain variable without widely adopted national standards and guidelines. This article highlights the educational and teaching applications of point-of-care US with a focus on outcomes. We then review the evidence on curricular design, delivery, and integration and the assessment of competency for point-of-care US in undergraduate medical education.

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.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.088
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.755
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.088
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0080.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0010.004
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 head0.128
GPT teacher head0.508
Teacher spread0.380 · 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