MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

DISTANCE LEARNING TODAY. WHAT DO PEDIATRICIANS THINK?

2021· article· en· W3202022691 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Volgograd State Medical University · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicForeign Language Teaching Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuarter (Canadian coin)Medical educationDistance educationPoint (geometry)Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)PsychologyPandemicWork (physics)MedicinePedagogyEngineeringHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, the authors share their observations on the attitude of pediatricians who underwent advanced training during the pandemic of a new coronavirus infection in the framework of distance learning (DL). According to the results of a correspondence survey, 77,7 % of respondents noted that pre-school education can be an auxiliary form for traditional education. Just under a quarter point to the unacceptability of DO in medical schools. During training, doctors faced a difficulty-lack of skills to work with online services (68 %). Of all forms, UP to 71,7 % chose teleconferences. To the question: «How important is the moment of personal communication with the teacher for You?» 69,9 % indicated that it is important, and 30,1 % considered that it is fundamentally important.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.695
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.298
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