MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3032994907 · doi:10.1111/medu.14264

The hidden curriculum and limitations of situational judgement tests for selection

2020· letter· en· W3032994907 on OpenAlexaff
Xuyi Mimi Wang, Vincent Leung

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Education · 2020
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMedical Education and Admissions
Canadian institutionsSt. Joseph’s Healthcare HamiltonMcMaster UniversitySt. Peter's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJudgementSituational ethicsCurriculumSelection (genetic algorithm)PsychologyHidden curriculumApplied psychologyEducational measurementMedical educationSocial psychologyComputer scienceMedicinePedagogyArtificial intelligencePolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

If situational judgment tests define who enters the health professions, we must be cautious and transparent in their use to avoid unintentional creation of a detrimental hidden curriculum.

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)0.144
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.508
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.144
Threshold uncertainty score0.759

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1440.508
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.013
Scholarly communication0.0060.009
Open science0.0050.003
Research integrity0.0110.019
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.003

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.314 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical EducationSame topicMedical Education and AdmissionsFrench-language works237,207