MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408739727 · doi:10.1002/prp2.70085

Roadmap and Reflections on Expanding Equity, Diversity, Inclusion, Indigeneity, and Accessibility in Pharmacology Curricula

2025· article· en· W4408739727 on OpenAlexafffundabout
R Rajakumar, Zena Agabani, Michelle I. Arnot

Bibliographic record

VenuePharmacology Research & Perspectives · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHealth and Medical Research Impacts
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsCurriculumInclusion (mineral)Medical educationEquity (law)Diversity (politics)Curriculum developmentPsychologyPedagogyMedicineSociologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nurturing learning systems that are respectful and welcoming to diverse individuals is a step towards improving the experience of all students in pharmacology and toxicology (Pharm-Tox). This paper evaluates the Pharm-Tox curriculum at the University of Toronto with a critical lens towards the incorporation of content that is Equitable, Diverse, Inclusive, acknowledges Indigeneity, and is Accessible (EDIIA). A curriculum mapping approach examined the undergraduate Pharm-Tox curriculum to identify EDIIA gaps and areas for improvement. Key stakeholders that contributed to the curriculum mapping process were undergraduate students, teaching faculty, and an external research associate who identified EDIIA themes used to evaluate existing course materials. The curriculum map identified areas to improve EDIIA integration in individual courses and resulted in the design of course-specific recommendations. Centrally housed department resources were also developed to mitigate barriers to faculty implementation of the EDIIA recommendations. These resources included an internal EDIIA handbook on appropriate language in the classroom, a guide to creating accessible and inclusive PowerPoint slides, and a pre-course survey to identify the student population and their needs. Resources were well received by faculty, and to assess the impact of EDIIA recommendations on student learning, ongoing review of curricular changes will be conducted through student surveys. The recommendations from this curriculum mapping process encourage faculty to explore opportunities for EDIIA integration in the undergraduate Pharm-Tox curriculum with the goal of strengthening the existing curriculum and improving the student learning experience.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Open science
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.376
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.009
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.352
GPT teacher head0.647
Teacher spread0.296 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePharmacology Research & PerspectivesSame topicHealth and Medical Research ImpactsFrench-language works237,207