MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Online Histology modules for first‐year medical students: a student to student approach

2013· article· en· W3170559994 on OpenAlexaff
Myra V. C. Butler, Heather Yule, Karen Pinder

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAI in cancer detection
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersAmerican Anthropological Association
KeywordsMedical educationPerspective (graphical)HistologyComputer scienceMultimediaMedicineMathematics educationPsychologyPathologyArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Three online training modules to introduce Histology were created by a second‐year medical student to provide a strong foundation for effective and efficient learning in the Histology laboratory. Members of all four medical school classes were surveyed for feedback on the most challenging and confusing concepts in Histology. Based on the results of over one hundred and forty student replies across all years, three online video modules were created: Approaching Histology; Introduction to Slide Preparation and Common Stains; and Introduction to Imagescope (digital slide viewing system). Content ranged from an overview of common stains and slide artifacts to understanding how to extrapolate 3‐ dimensional structures from 2‐dimensional slides. These modules are unique as they were created from the perspective of a fellow student and targeted the most common needs identified by the student‐body survey. This student‐initiated summer project was funded by the University of British Columbia Department of Cellular and Physiological Sciences. Grant Funding Source : AAA

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.048
Threshold uncertainty score0.162

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0030.012
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0480.017

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.286 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB Journal→Same topicAI in cancer detection→French-language works237,207→