MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2801786618 · doi:10.17294/2330-0698.1589

Patients Are Our Teachers

2018· article· en· W2801786618 on OpenAlexaff
Robert E. Becker, Mary V. Seeman

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of patient-centered research and reviews · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEmpathy and Medical Education
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoInstitute of Aging
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHippocratic OathSketchAlternative medicineMedicineQuality (philosophy)Medical educationPopulationHealth careFamily medicinePsychologyPsychiatryEpistemologyPathologyPolitical sciencePhilosophyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the patient-physician encounter, physicians hone their skills while alleviating the patient's suffering. Both benefit. Leaning on the work of Hippocrates, Darwin, and William Osler, the authors sketch out the case for honoring patients as indispensable teachers of the art and science of medicine. They argue that this tradition of Hippocratic medicine both anticipates modern precision medicine and reawakens a focus on public health medicine, each a benefit to the patients and communities served by physicians. A community that compromises the learning relationship of physician to patient and population undermines quality of care.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.596
Threshold uncertainty score0.271

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.141
GPT teacher head0.441
Teacher spread0.301 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations14
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of patient-centered research and reviewsSame topicEmpathy and Medical EducationFrench-language works237,207