MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385394695 · doi:10.1111/medu.15173

Disembodied, dehumanised but safe and feasible: The social‐spatial flow of a pandemic OSCE

2023· article· en· W4385394695 on OpenAlexaff
Craig Brown, Anna MacLeod, Lorraine Hawick, Jennifer Cleland

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Education · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLegal, Health, Environmental and COVID-19 Challenges
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAffordanceObjective structured clinical examinationDocumentationSociologyProcess (computing)Space (punctuation)PsychologyComputer scienceMedical educationEngineering ethicsMedicineEngineeringHuman–computer interaction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: The Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) is a key feature of healthcare education assessment. Many aspects of the OSCE are well-investigated, but not so its sociomaterial assemblage. The Covid-19 pandemic provided a unique opportunity to (re)consider taken-for-granted OSCE practices. Drawing on Law's modes of ordering, our aim was to demonstrate the 'mangle of practice' between space and people; the spatialised and spatialising processes of an OSCE. METHODS: We used a case study approach to critically examine a redesigned final year MBChB OSCE held during the pandemic. We used multiple sources of data to attune to human and non-human actors: OSCE documentation, photographs, field notes and semi-structured interviews with OSCE staff/organisers. Law's modes of ordering was used as an analytical lens to critically consider how people and things flowed through the adapted OSCE. FINDINGS: The overarching ordering was the delivery of a 'pandemic safe' OSCE. This necessitated reordering of 'usual' process to deliver a socially distanced, safe flow of human and non-human actors through the assessment space. Each change had material and social 'knock on' effects. We identified three main interrelated orderings: Substituting technologies for bodies: Disembodied and dehumanised but feasible; Flow through space: Architectural affordances and one-way traffic; Barriers to flow: Time and technology. DISCUSSION: Looking at the OSCE through a sociomaterial lens allows us to critically examine the OSCE's essential and complex processes and the restrictions and affordances of the spaces and props within the OSCE. In doing so, we open the possibility of considering alternative ways of doing OSCEs in the future. Moreover, conceptualising the OSCE as a living set of socially (human) and materially (nonhuman) enacted processes changes the social perception of the OSCE and highlights that an OSCE has agency on people, places and things.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0110.044
Scholarly communication0.0090.009
Open science0.0010.014
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.321 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical EducationSame topicLegal, Health, Environmental and COVID-19 ChallengesFrench-language works237,207