Need for Prominent Core Curricula Designed and Taught by Persons with Disabilities in All Levels of Medical Education
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The need for comprehensive core curricula in medical education regarding the health of persons with disabilities has been identified by disability scholars for many years and was recently reinforced by our research indicating Canadian physicians lack knowledge of the social model of disability, and their legal duty to ensure accommodation for persons with disabilities to have equal access to health. The purpose of the current research is to investigate the existence of core medical education curricula devoted to the health of persons with disabilities and determine whether persons with disabilities were involved as curricular designers and educators. A comprehensive literature search of all academic sites found few papers reporting on such curricula, and the time devoted to these curricula was small. Only one medical school internationally was found to have persons with disabilities playing a major role as curricular designers. Further problematic was that “disability” tended to be portrayed by non-disabled professional actors hired as standardized patients (SPs), and only occasionally by actors with disabilities but in scripted SP roles distant from their lived experience. We contend that if persons with disabilities designed medical curricula, non-disabled SPs would be replaced by persons with disabilities as medical educators, sharing their own lived experiences. Another alternative in replacing professional able-bodied actor SPs is the novel education method of digital storytelling, with disabled persons sharing their lived experiences. Another immediate opportunity exists in Canada in the newly developing competency-based curricula for prominent core competencies to be designed and taught by persons with disabilities.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.015 | 0.040 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".