Charter on Medical Professionalism: Putting the Charter into Practice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Letters20 May 2003Charter on Medical Professionalism: Putting the Charter into PracticeSylvia L. Cruess, MD and Richard L. Cruess, MDSylvia L. Cruess, MDCenter for Medical Education, McGill University; Montreal, Quebec H3G 1Y6, Canada (Cruess, Richard)Search for more papers by this author and Richard L. Cruess, MDCenter for Medical Education, McGill University; Montreal, Quebec H3G 1Y6, Canada (Cruess, Richard)Search for more papers by this authorAuthor, Article, and Disclosure Informationhttps://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-138-10-200305200-00028 SectionsAboutFull TextPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissions ShareFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail IN RESPONSE:Although Dr. Arnett's points are well taken, the charter is not a code of ethics, nor is it intended to detract from or supplant the Hippocratic tradition that has long enriched medicine's history. It is a statement of contemporary responsibilitiesmedicine's understanding of its obligations under today's social contract. We strongly disagree that individual rights and group rights are mutually exclusive and that the physician can follow one of these two principles but not both. We do not underestimate the difficulty of reconciling the two sets of responsibilities but believe passionately that medicine must attempt to do so. The ... Author, Article, and Disclosure InformationAuthors: Sylvia L. Cruess, MD; Richard L. Cruess, MDAffiliations: Center for Medical Education, McGill University; Montreal, Quebec H3G 1Y6, Canada (Cruess, Richard) PreviousarticleNextarticle Advertisement FiguresReferencesRelatedDetailsSee AlsoMedical Professionalism in the New Millennium: A Physician CharterProject of the ABIM Foundation, ACP–ASIM Foundation, and European Federation of Internal Medicine*Charter on Medical Professionalism: Putting the Charter into Practice Robert Feldman Charter on Medical Professionalism: Putting the Charter into Practice Walter J. McDonald Charter on Medical Professionalism: Putting the Charter into Practice Steven A. Wartman Charter on Medical Professionalism: Putting the Charter into Practice Jordan J. Cohen Charter on Medical Professionalism: Putting the Charter into Practice Yevgeniya Nusinovich Charter on Medical Professionalism: Putting the Charter into Practice Risa Lavizzo-Mourey Charter on Medical Professionalism: Putting the Charter into Practice Christopher J. Lyons Charter on Medical Professionalism: Putting the Charter into Practice Richard L. Cruess and Sylvia L. Cruess Charter on Medical Professionalism: Putting the Charter into Practice Sadeq A. Quraishi and Ayesha N. Khalid Charter on Medical Professionalism: Putting the Charter into Practice Neil J. Smelser Charter on Medical Professionalism: Putting the Charter into Practice Charles M. Haskell Charter on Medical Professionalism: Putting the Charter into Practice Neil J. Smelser Charter on Medical Professionalism: Putting the Charter into Practice Donatella Lippi , GianFranco Gensini , and Andrea A. Conti Charter on Medical Professionalism: Putting the Charter into Practice Neil J. Smelser Charter on Medical Professionalism: Putting the Charter into Practice Jerome C. Arnett Jr. Metrics 20 May 2003Volume 138, Issue 10Page: 853-854KeywordsConflicts of interestEmotionsHealth careHistory of medicinePatient advocacy ePublished: 20 May 2003 Issue Published: 20 May 2003 Copyright & PermissionsCopyright © 2003 by American College of Physicians. All Rights Reserved.PDF downloadLoading ...
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 | 0.078 | 0.231 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.018 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.017 | 0.024 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.011 |
| Research integrity | 0.039 | 0.043 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.018 | 0.011 |
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".