MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3024491914 · doi:10.22374/cjgim.v14i3.322

Education Research - GIM

2019· article· en· W3024491914 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Annabelle Cumyn, Sharon E. Card, Paul Gibson

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of General Internal Medicine · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth Sciences Research and Education
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of SaskatchewanUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBlueprintSpecialtyMedical educationPerspective (graphical)CurriculumContent (measure theory)Family medicinePedagogyPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Obstetric Medicine is an area of expertise within General Internal Medicine (GIM) in Canada. Essential content for clinical rotations for GIM residents was identified by subject-matter experts (N=204 items). However, this work did not address the perspective of curriculum stakeholders. Methods Members of the Canadian GIM Specialty Committee (GIMSC) were surveyed to obtain their perspective on essential content that GIM residents should acquire in Obstetric Medicine. Results GIMSC members (N=14) selected “core content” which reduced the initial content blueprint by 72%. Some sections of the blueprint were left largely unchanged (e.g., hypertensive disorders of pregnancy), whereas others were removed entirely (e.g., transplant medicine). Interpretation GIMSC were more selective than Canadian Obstetric Internists in choosing the essential content for GIM residents, with a moderate overall agreement of 78% ( kappa coefficient of 0.53). Comparison of perspectives and content mapping may provide useful validity evidence for further work.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.111
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.252
GPT teacher head0.582
Teacher spread0.330 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of General Internal MedicineSame topicHealth Sciences Research and EducationFrench-language works237,207