MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7100588053

Attrition From Premedical Studies Among Latinas: Case

2016· article· en· W7100588053 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience, Education and Cognitive Function
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAttritionUnderrepresented MinorityQuarter (Canadian coin)African americanCareer PathwaysCareer pathMedical school
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Minorities are significantly underrepresented in the U.S. physician workforce. Female minorities wishing to become doctors face additional gender barriers, since women who enter college with the desire of becoming physicians are more likely than men to exit programs of undergraduate studies (“premed studies”) that lead to medical school. To explore the factors that may cause minority women to lose interest in a medical career, in-depth one-to-one interviews were conducted during the first quarter of freshman year with minority women who had said prior to matriculating that they were interested in pursuing a career in medicine. Interviews with seven Latinas were analyzed to develop grounded theory to identify potential causes of attrition from premedical studies within this underrepresented group. Findings point to the importance of linking such students into premedical-student support systems at the beginning of their freshman year to retain them in the premedical pipeline and argue that the mechanisms that push students out of the “premed pipeline ” operate at the institutional level to passively, rather than actively, discourage premedical students ’ career ambitions. 378129 HJB32410.1177/0739986310378129Gonzal ez et al.Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.051
Threshold uncertainty score0.101

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0070.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.118
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNeuroscience, Education and Cognitive FunctionFrench-language works237,207