MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410354909 · doi:10.46747/cfp.7105296_1

Collaboration required to fix “hidden curriculum”

2025· letter· en· W4410354909 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Martina Kelly, Ann Lee, Lyn Power, Nathalie Boudreault, Maria Hubinette

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Family Physician · 2025
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHigher Education Learning Practices
Canadian institutionsQuest University Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceCurriculumData scienceWorld Wide WebMedical educationMedicinePsychologyPedagogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We read the commentary “[Just family doctors. Hidden curriculum against family medicine in medical schools][1]”[1][2] in the January 2025 issue of Canadian Family Physician with great interest. While we cannot deny the existence of a hidden curriculum, many educational leaders across Canada are

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)0.020
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.110
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.123
Threshold uncertainty score0.244

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0200.110
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0210.011
Scholarly communication0.0070.010
Open science0.0040.011
Research integrity0.0690.095
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0220.007

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.305 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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 Family PhysicianSame topicHigher Education Learning PracticesFrench-language works237,207