MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2911097004 · doi:10.1097/acm.0000000000002597

Fostering Transformative Learning in a Social Pediatrics Research Summer Studentship

2019· article· en· W2911097004 on OpenAlexaffabout
Susanna Talarico, Mohammad Zubairi, Denis Daneman, Angela Punnett, Maria Athina Martimianakis

Bibliographic record

VenueAcademic Medicine · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInnovations in Medical Education
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoMcMaster Children's HospitalMcMaster University Medical CentreThe Wilson CentreHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransformative learningFeelingCurriculumThematic analysisMedical educationPsychologyCritical thinkingPedagogyQualitative researchMedicineSociologySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PROBLEM: Teaching future doctors the skills necessary to address health disparities is a challenge for medical educators. In response, the authors developed and implemented the Social Pediatrics Research Summer Studentship (SPReSS) program for medical students at the University of Toronto. APPROACH: The curriculum incorporated research and clinical placements into a formal seminar series. Participating students were required to complete a research project and to write a reflection describing a situation that challenged their thinking. The authors and curriculum developers applied transformative learning principles not only to facilitate critical reflection and learning in the students but also as an innovative approach to program development and evaluation. The authors conducted a thematic analysis of the reflections of 23 students participating in the program in June and July 2013, 2014, and 2015 to evaluate the SPReSS program. OUTCOMES: The analysis revealed students' empathic responses to marginalized patients, and these responses acted as triggers for critical reflection. Students described feeling empowered to act as advocates and wrote that these feelings were reinforced through faculty members' role modeling. According to their reflections, students found the program both challenging and rewarding, particularly the integration of the clinical and research experiences which made broader sociopolitical phenomena introduced through assigned readings and seminar discussions concrete. NEXT STEPS: The authors are exploring models, including a fourth-year selective or multiyear longitudinal experience, to support more students. They also hope to involve more community partners and to evaluate long-term outcomes of participants.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.032
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.168

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0320.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0120.013
Scholarly communication0.0080.004
Open science0.0030.025
Research integrity0.0030.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.202
GPT teacher head0.519
Teacher spread0.317 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations7
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAcademic MedicineSame topicInnovations in Medical EducationFrench-language works237,207