Análisis del programa Propedéutica Clínica y Semiología Médica. Una metodología estructurada por pasos
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: The designs established in the different syllabuses should be in complete agreement with the demands of society. Therefore, an analysis should be carried out in order to improve them permanently.Objective: To determine the scope and limitations of the syllabus of the subject Semiology and Clinical Propedeutics. Material and Methods: A qualitative study from a pedagogical perspective was conducted from April 1st to June 31st, 2017, which assumes the materialistic dialectic method with an approach on the system as the main action of the research process in order to carry out a critical syllabus analysis. The methodology used for this consists of five main steps which include, among other elements, the appropriateness and the review of the components of the teaching-learning process.Results and discussion: A critical syllabus analysis was carried out, and aspects for the improvement and a didactic unit of contradiction related to the clinical discussion in the medical students were identified at recognizing a disagreement between the subject contents and the ideal way to teach them, thus considering it a methodological problem. Conclusions: The curriculum satisfies the integrative idea of Commander Fidel in relation to the teaching-learning process for the formation of doctors in Cuba at advising a comprehensive formation, implementing the in-service training, and increasing the students´ leading role that guarantees a human, scientific, and technical quality, directed to give a better care to the people. The use of this methodology can be generalized.Keywords: Medical education, syllabus, critics, profile of graduates, Semiology, Clinical Propedeutics.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.024 | 0.041 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".