226 Canadian Family Physician • Le Médecin de famille canadien | Vol 58: FEBRUARY • FÉVRIER 2012 Residents ’ Views | College • Collège Doing more
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In February 2011, I participated in an international elective in Zamboanga City, a large urban centre in the southern Philippines. Throughout my stay, I facili-tated sessions at the Rural Medicine Conference of the Philippines; I taught a module at the Ateneo de Zamboanga University School of Medicine; and I completed a clinical rotation at the Zamboanga City Medical Centre. My pri-mary goal was to learn more about practising family medi-cine in a resource-poor setting. Before arriving, I had read about the complexities of the Philippine health care system. The system is primarily modeled on the American system, while providing free basic health services. To better under-stand the role of family medicine in primary care deliv-ery in the Philippines, I collected qualitative data with an informal questionnaire distributed to several Filipino med-ical students and family medicine residents. From these data, and from my brief personal experience, it appears
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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 teacher head, 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".