MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412685111 · doi:10.3329/cbmj.v14i2.83326

Role Modelling in Medical Education

2025· article· en· W4412685111 on OpenAlexaff
Abu Sadat Mohammad Nurunnabi, Md Billal Alam, Feroza Wazed, Sajed Abdul Khaleque, Md Abdul Muqueet

Bibliographic record

VenueCommunity Based Medical Journal · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicInterprofessional Education and Collaboration
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Forming professional and humanistic physicians for the 21st century is a great challenge for medical educators worldwide. Role modelling by the medical teachers can be positive or negative and the challenge for us is to reduce the influence of negative role modelling. Positive role modelling has been defined as the process whereby faculty members exhibit knowledge, attitude, and skills; demonstrate and articulate expert thought processes; and manifest positive professional behaviour and characteristics. Role modelling is undoubtedly important in professional character formation and enhancing moral values among medical students, interns and residents who will serve the nation in future. In medical colleges and higher medical institutions of our country, some of the faculties from basic sciences and mostly clinical teachers consciously or unconsciously become positive and influential role models for the students, interns and residents. It is imperative that we as medical teachers and our institutions will come forward so that the educational environment in both undergraduate and postgraduate education supports such positive role modelling in medical education and training. Role modelling takes place in three interrelated educational environments which are the formal, informal, and hidden curriculum. Formal curriculum is the planned and structured part of medical education, including lectures, textbooks, and assessments, as we teach and train medical ethics and professionalism in regular curriculum. The informal curriculum is defined as an unspecified, predominantly ad hoc and highly interpersonal form of teaching and learning that takes place among and between faculty and students. The hidden curriculum has been defined as a set of influences that function at the level of organizational and culture, influenced by its people and environment. In this review, we tried to explore the impact of role modelling as well as the characteristics of positive role models and how role modelling could be integrated in our curriculum. CBMJ 2025 July: vol. 14 no. 02 P:208-213

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.012
Scholarly communication0.0070.006
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0040.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.489
Teacher spread0.443 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCommunity Based Medical JournalSame topicInterprofessional Education and CollaborationFrench-language works237,207