MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410019844 · doi:10.36834/cmej.81477

Embracing the next frontier in assessment

2025· editorial· en· W4410019844 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Christina St‐Onge

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Medical Education Journal · 2025
Typeeditorial
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicStudent Assessment and Feedback
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFrontierComputer scienceData scienceComputational biologyBiologyGeographyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A frequent saying in our field is that "assessment is the engine driving medical education," 1 and perhaps no moment in recent history has offered greater potential for reimagining that engine than now.As the Canadian Medical Education Journal (CMEJ) marks its 15th anniversary, we find ourselves at a crossroads: technological advances-particularly in artificial intelligence (AI)-are poised to transform how we assess and support learners.Will we harness these innovations to foster wellness and inclusivity, or will we remain anchored to our traditions?

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: Editorial
Teacher disagreement score0.474
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.379
Teacher spread0.365 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEditorial

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 venueCanadian Medical Education JournalSame topicStudent Assessment and FeedbackFrench-language works237,207