MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4361266829 · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-2689762/v1

Evaluating the Impact of Continuing Professional Development Courses on Physician Behavioral Intention: A Pre-Post Study with Follow-Up at Six Months

2023· preprint· en· W4361266829 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Felly Bakwa Kanyinga, Amédé Gogovor, Suélène Georgina Dofara, Souleymane Gadio, Martin Tremblay, Sam J. Daniel, Louis‐Paul Rivest, France Légaré

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Square · 2023
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealthcare professionals’ stress and burnout
Canadian institutionsFédération des Maisons D'Hébergement pour FemmesCentre intégré universitaire de santé et de services sociaux de la Capitale-NationaleCentres Intégré Universitaires de Santé et de Services SociauxUniversité Laval
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsPsychosocialWilcoxon signed-rank testContinuing professional developmentMedicineHealth professionalsPsychologyFamily medicinePopulationTest (biology)Professional developmentClinical psychologyHealth careMedical educationCurriculumPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OpenAlex records an abstract for this work, but it could not be fetched just now.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.325
GPT teacher head0.614
Teacher spread0.290 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch Square→Same topicHealthcare professionals’ stress and burnout→French-language works237,207→