MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400664051 · doi:10.2147/amep.s447843

Key Learnings and Perspectives of a Newly Implemented Sex-and Gender-Based Medicine Modular Course Integrated into the First-Year Medical School Curriculum: A Mixed-Method Survey

2024· article· en· W4400664051 on OpenAlexaff
Nicola Luigi Bragazzi, Hicham Khabbache, Khalid Ouazizi, Driss Ait Ali, Hanane El Ghouat, Laïla El Alami, Hisham Atwan, Ruba Tuma, Nomy Dickman, Raymond Farah, Rola Khamisy‐Farah

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in Medical Education and Practice · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSex and Gender in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCurriculumHelpfulnessLikert scaleMedical educationThematic analysisPsychologyQualitative researchQualitative propertyHealth careContent analysisMedicinePedagogyComputer scienceSociologySocial psychologySocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: Sex and Gender-Based Medicine (SGBM) addresses the influence of sex and gender on health and healthcare, emphasizing personalized care. Integrating SGBM into medical education is challenging. This study examines the implementation of an SGBM course in an Israeli university during the first year of the medical school. Methods: The course integrated lectures, group work, online gender studies resources, workshops, teacher training, and essential literature. The curriculum spanned pre-clinical and clinical aspects, featuring seven 90-minute sessions. Surveys assessed course structure, content, and lecturers using a 5-point Likert scale and qualitative feedback. Quantitative analysis involved descriptive statistics, and thematic analysis was used for qualitative data. Results: Of the 84 students surveyed, 35 (41.7%) responded to the first part, and 30 (35.7%) to the second. The SGBM course received high satisfaction with an average score of 3.63, surpassing other first-year courses (average 3.21). Students appreciated the supportive academic atmosphere (mean score 4.20) and diverse teaching methods (mean score 4.03), while the development of feminist thinking was less appreciated (average score 3.49). Lecturers received high ratings (average score 4.33). Qualitative feedback highlighted the value of group work, the significance of the subject matter, and the helpfulness of supplementary videos. Students requested more content on contemporary issues like gender transition and patient perspectives. The feminist medicine aspect was contentious, with students seeking better gender balance and scientific evidence. Conclusion: Introducing SGBM into the first-year curriculum yielded positive results with high student satisfaction for content and lecturers. An expanded course module is planned, to be assessed at the end of the next academic year.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.002
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.464
Teacher spread0.427 · 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

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in Medical Education and PracticeSame topicSex and Gender in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207