MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387386827 · doi:10.5114/pr.2022.131064

An assessment of the knowledge of medical students about lymphedema – a survey-based study

2022· article· en· W4387386827 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Wiktor Kruczek, Wiktoria Szlachta, Tomasz Urbanek

Bibliographic record

VenuePhlebological Review · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicHealth, Work, and Social Studies in Poland
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLymphedemaMedicineFamily medicineGynecologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Lymphoedema is a dysfunction of the lymphatic system and a chronic disease.Knowledge about lymphedema is crucial for avoiding risk factors and for early recognition of the first lymphoedema signs.In the study, the authors assess both the knowledge and attitude towards lymphoedema among medical students of the Medical University of Silesia in Katowice.This study aimed to discuss the importance of spreading knowledge about lymphoedema. Material and methods:The study assessed the knowledge of medical students about lymphoedema by using a dedicated questionnaire.The survey study was conducted from February 2022 to April 2022 and included medical students from the Medical University of Silesia in Katowice.Results: The questionnaire was completed by 138 medical students in years 1-6.Most students (48.2%) stated that their knowledge was average, and a significant number of students claimed that they had never heard about lymphoedema during their university classes.Statistical analysis revealed that subjective assessment of knowledge and college level were dependent on each other, but there was no correlation with the objective assessment.The results showed that there was no relationship between gender and calculated body mass index (BMI) with either subjective or objective evaluation of knowledge about lymphoedema themed.Conclusions: Knowledge about lymphoedema among the study participants is insufficient.Appropriate education of medical students is essential, which is crucial for early recognition of the first signs of lymphoedema among students and their future patients.Females and individuals with high BMI with higher risk of developing lymphoedema do not have greater awareness about lymphoedema, which can delay its recognition and early treatment.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
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 score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.125
GPT teacher head0.554
Teacher spread0.428 · 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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhlebological ReviewSame topicHealth, Work, and Social Studies in PolandFrench-language works237,207