MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2913054479 · doi:10.1080/0142159x.2019.1566603

Examining the clinical learning environment through the architectural avenue

2019· article· en· W2913054479 on OpenAlexaff
Jonas Nordquist, Ming‐Ka Chan, Jerry M Maniate, David Cook, C. Kelly, Allan McDougall

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Teacher · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEmpathy and Medical Education
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaOttawa HospitalUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConceptual frameworkCurriculumEngineering ethicsMaterialismPsychologySociologyMedical educationKnowledge managementMedicinePedagogyComputer scienceEpistemologyEngineeringSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Medical education has traditionally focused on the learners, the educators, and the curriculum, while tending to overlook the role of the designed environment. Experience indicates, however, that processes and outcomes of medical education are sensitive to the qualities and disposition of the spaces in which it occurs. This includes the clinical education within the patient care environment, termed the clinical learning environment (CLE). Recognition of this has informed the design of some new clinical learning spaces for the past decade. Competency-based clinical education can drive design requirements that differ materially from those associated with general purpose educational or clinical spaces. In this article, we outline two conceptual frameworks: (i) materialist spatiality and (ii) actor-network theory and consider how they can guide the design of spaces to support competency-based medical education and to guide the evaluation and discussion of the educational impacts of the spaces once built. We illustrate the use of these frameworks through discussion of the educational ambitions that underpinned the design of some recent clinical educational spaces. We close with practical points for consideration by educators and designers.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.021
Scholarly communication0.0090.008
Open science0.0010.008
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.289 · 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

Citations18
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical TeacherSame topicEmpathy and Medical EducationFrench-language works237,207