LIMEs and LEMONs: Critically Examining the Effect of a Blog Post on Junior Faculty Learners
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The usage of asynchronous resources such as blogs and podcasts is pervasive in academic medicine, despite little understanding of their actual effect on learner knowledge acquisition. This study sought to examine the objective effect of a blog post on knowledge acquisition and application among junior faculty in emergency medicine (EM) via randomized controlled study. METHODS: All accredited EM residency programs in the United States and Canada were contacted to identify assistant and associate program directors and medical education fellows for recruitment into this study. Upon enrollment, participants were randomized as to whether they received access to a supplemental blog post prior to listening to a podcast episode. After listening to the podcast episode, all participants completed an assessment that included a test of knowledge application and knowledge acquisition; demographic information was also obtained. RESULTS: Ultimately, 103 participants completed the study; the study closed for enrollment in July 2019. Data were nonnormally distributed and groups were compared using the Wilcoxon rank-sum test. There were no significant differences between the demographics of the two groups nor was there a significant difference in knowledge between the two groups. CONCLUSION: The addition of a supplementary blog post did not increase junior faculty knowledge of a podcast episode.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".