MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4377164179 · doi:10.2196/47934

Data Analysis of Physician Competence Research Trend: Social Network Analysis and Topic Modeling Approach

2023· article· en· W4377164179 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
So Jung Yune, Youngjon Kim, Jea Woog Lee

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Medical Informatics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNursing
TopicHealthcare Education and Workforce Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCompetence (human resources)Core competencyMedical educationHealth carePsychologyMedicineKnowledge managementComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Studies on competency in medical education often explore the acquisition, performance, and evaluation of particular skills, knowledge, or behaviors that constitute physician competency. As physician competency reflects social demands according to changes in the medical environment, analyzing the research trends of physician competency by period is necessary to derive major research topics for future studies. Therefore, a more macroscopic method is required to analyze the core competencies of physicians in this era. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to analyze research trends related to physicians' competency in reflecting social needs according to changes in the medical environment. METHODS: We used topic modeling to identify potential research topics by analyzing data from studies related to physician competency published between 2011 and 2020. We preprocessed 1354 articles and extracted 272 keywords. RESULTS: The terms that appeared most frequently in the research related to physician competency since 2010 were knowledge, hospital, family, job, guidelines, management, and communication. The terms that appeared in most studies were education, model, knowledge, and hospital. Topic modeling revealed that the main topics about physician competency included Evidence-based clinical practice, Community-based healthcare, Patient care, Career and self-management, Continuous professional development, and Communication and cooperation. We divided the studies into 4 periods (2011-2013, 2014-2016, 2017-2019, and 2020-2021) and performed a linear regression analysis. The results showed a change in topics by period. The hot topics that have shown increased interest among scholars over time include Community-based healthcare, Career and self-management, and Continuous professional development. CONCLUSIONS: On the basis of the analysis of research trends, it is predicted that physician professionalism and community-based medicine will continue to be studied in future studies on physician competency.

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 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)0.021
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.071
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Bibliometrics
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.979
Threshold uncertainty score0.108

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0210.071
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.004
Bibliometrics0.0410.031
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.193
GPT teacher head0.480
Teacher spread0.287 · 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.

Study designObservational
DomainMethods
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

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Medical InformaticsSame topicHealthcare Education and Workforce IssuesFrench-language works237,207