Thinking Globally in the Pursuit of Individual Identity: Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in the International Journal of Medical Students (IJMS)
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) are core values that are unequivocally essential to healthcare research and practice. However, global health inequities remain pervasive and disruptive to the delivery of healthcare. This unacceptable lack of inclusivity and equity infiltrates all aspects of medicine, including research and publication. Accordingly, there is a dissemination of unbalanced and homogenous perspectives which are not representative of the global population. The International Journal of Medical Students (IJMS) has strived to counter such biases through the development of content and the process of its publication. Further, the selection of its editorial team and ambassadors is conducted with the intention of diversity. We respect individual differences and celebrate them as strengths adding to the quality of our journal. Therefore, the IJMS has taken a positive step toward an equitable environment by publishing a policy statement on DEI. We hope to lead by example by fostering a culture of inclusivity for all researchers, regardless of background. Though, we recognize the complexity of implementing comprehensive DEI practices and consider it our duty to the community that we continuously develop through a dedicated effort and iterative process.
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.
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | Open science Domain: not available · Genre: Commentary About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Not applicable | high |
| gpt | MetaresearchScholarly communicationOpen science Domain: Evaluation · Genre: Commentary About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Not applicable | high |
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.145 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.097 | 0.168 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it