MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405515380 · doi:10.36834/cmej.79812

Analysis of authentic assessment in health professions education: a scoping review and concept analysis protocol

2024· review· en· W4405515380 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Ethan Bazos, Andrea Quaiattini, Meredith Young

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Medical Education Journal · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInnovations in Medical Education
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProtocol (science)Computer scienceData scienceMedicineAlternative medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Analysis of authentic assessment in health professions education: A scoping review and concept analysis protocol. Un article de la revue Canadian Medical Education Journal / Revue canadienne de l'éducation médicale (Volume 15, numéro 6, 2024, p. 1-102) diffusée par la plateforme Érudit.

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)0.194
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.262
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.194
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1940.262
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0110.012
Bibliometrics0.0210.017
Science and technology studies0.0060.007
Scholarly communication0.0070.007
Open science0.0050.008
Research integrity0.0070.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0410.009

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.533
Teacher spread0.485 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Medical Education JournalSame topicInnovations in Medical EducationFrench-language works237,207