RIME 60 Years: Celebration and Future Horizons
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This year marks the 60th anniversary (1961-2021) of Research in Medical Education (RIME). Over the past 6 decades, RIME has selected medical education research to be presented each year at the Association of American Medical Colleges Annual Meeting: Learn Serve Lead and published in a supplement of Academic Medicine. In this article, the authors surveyed RIME chairs from the past 20 years to identify ways that RIME has advanced medical education research and to generate ideas for future directions. RIME chairs described advancements in the rigor and impact of RIME research and the timeliness of the topics, often serving as a driver for cutting-edge research. They highlighted RIME's role in promoting qualitative research, introducing new epistemologies, and encouraging networking as a means of career advancement. Going forward, RIME chairs suggested (1) strengthening collaborations with formal advanced MEd and PhD degree programs, (2) creating formal mentorship channels for junior and minority faculty, and (3) promoting research related to knowledge translation.
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 | 0.012 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.012 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.054 | 0.015 |
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".