MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2998319812 · doi:10.1111/medu.14037

Approaching culture in medical education: Three perspectives

2019· article· en· W2998319812 on OpenAlexaff
Christopher Watling, Rola Ajjawi, Margaret Bearman

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Education · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInnovations in Medical Education
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSociologyFacilitatorPerspective (graphical)Organizational cultureCulture changeIdentity (music)EpistemologyNarrativeSocial psychologyPsychologyPublic relationsAestheticsSocial sciencePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The notion of culture is increasingly invoked in the medical education literature as a key influence on how educational strategies unfold, and culture change is frequently identified as a necessary precursor to progress. A meaningful perspective on what culture means is often missing from these discussions, however. Without a theoretically grounded notion of culture, calls for culture change are challenging to interpret and to act upon. OBJECTIVE: In this cross-cutting edge paper, we explore how culture has been defined and theorised using three lenses: the organisational perspective; the identity perspective, and the practice perspective. We consider what each perspective might offer to medical education researchers. RESULTS: Each of these perspectives draws on a range of disciplinary influences, and none represents a singular theory of culture. Broadly, the organisational perspective directs our attention to the shared assumptions and values that bind individuals within an organisation. It tends to view culture through a strategic lens; culture may be either a barrier to or a facilitator of the changes that are inevitably required of an organisation if it is to maintain its relevance. The identity perspective, particularly the notion of figured worlds, alerts us to the power of communal narratives to shape how individuals see themselves within particular cultural worlds. The practice perspective emphasises what actually occurs in practice, avoiding symbolic ideas about culture and shared values and instead privileging activity and human-material networks or arrangements. CONCLUSIONS: These diverse perspectives share a common thread- they shift our research gaze beyond the individual, allowing us instead to see how those individuals form organisations, inhabit cultural worlds and constitute practices. They afford substance and direction for explorations of culture, and thus offer the promise of a more nuanced understanding of some of medical education's most challenging problems.

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)0.024
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.157

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0240.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0090.007
Science and technology studies0.0130.083
Scholarly communication0.0300.027
Open science0.0030.022
Research integrity0.0090.016
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.340 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations74
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical EducationSame topicInnovations in Medical EducationFrench-language works237,207