MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2895076855 · doi:10.1007/s40037-018-0454-5

Lessons learned from a student-driven initiative to design and implement an Organ and Tissue Donation course across Canadian medical schools

2018· article· en· W2895076855 on OpenAlexaffabout
Alexandra Fletcher, Bing‐Yu Chen, David Benrimoh, Sam D. Shemie, Stuart Lubarsky

Bibliographic record

VenuePerspectives on Medical Education · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHealth and Medical Research Impacts
Canadian institutionsMontreal General HospitalMcMaster UniversityMcGill UniversityMcGill University Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAccreditationCurriculumScholarshipMedical educationProcess (computing)Graduate medical educationIdentity (music)Engineering ethicsMedicinePolitical sciencePedagogyPsychologyEngineeringComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The competencies required of the well-trained physician are constantly evolving, and medical education must adapt accordingly. In response, a growing number of influential medical education licensing and accreditation bodies have proposed frameworks that outline society's expectations of physician competencies. In Canada, undergraduate and graduate curricula have undergone major changes to meet the specifications of the CanMEDS framework, and similar efforts are underway internationally. Nonetheless, ensuring the values enshrined within such frameworks become integral to a physician's identity remains challenging. We believe that student-led curricular initiatives represent a novel way of approaching this shifting medical education landscape.In this article, we reflect on lessons we learned as medical students spearheading an initiative to change how organ and tissue donation is taught in Canadian medical schools. Citing relevant medical education literature where applicable, we include a detailed description of our approach as a roadmap for students contemplating their own curricular innovations. By outlining the factors influencing this project's implementation, as well as the benefits and limitations of student participation in curriculum reform, we offer educators a fresh perspective on optimizing the student role in this important process. Ultimately, the authors argue that not only can student participation render curricular content more accessible to learners, but that the responsibilities students take on in this role naturally lead to the development of CanMEDs-based competencies such as advocacy, scholarship, and inter-professionalism.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.060
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 score0.831
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.060
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)0.0040.000

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 head0.210
GPT teacher head0.564
Teacher spread0.353 · 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

Citations19
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePerspectives on Medical EducationSame topicHealth and Medical Research ImpactsFrench-language works237,207