MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7144138395 · doi:10.15057/85111

Historical Developments in Ensuring Education for Children undergoing Medical Treatment : Focusing on Developments in English-speaking Countries

2025· article· en· W7144138395 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Taku MURAYAMA

Bibliographic record

VenueInstitutional Repositories DataBase (IRDB) · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicChild and Adolescent Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScope (computer science)Sick childPerspective (graphical)Medical treatmentOrder (exchange)Medical careHealth care

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article, in order to obtain clues for the historical verification of education for sick children, the historical development of such education are reviewed to obtain a historical perspective on the guaranteeing education for children undergoing medical treatment, focusing mainly on English- speaking countries. The reason for focusing on developments in English-speaking countries in this paper is that it may be useful to note the development of the so-called “new history of medicine.” In the UK, it is confirmed that educational guarantees for sick children were institutionalized from an early stage along with the development of childrenʼs hospitals. In the US, it is also confirmed that educational guarantees for children who require medical care has been established at the federal level, and that the scope and scope of the guarantees has been expanded, sometimes accompanied by litigation. In Canada, it is confirmed that the development of the Toronto Childrenʼs Hospital, based on previous research is a noteworthy example. The impact and influence of COVID-19 in the recent past is also outlined. It is considered necessary for children undergoing medical treatment to learn in a special environment due to their health and medical constraints. Discussions on inclusive education have become active, and the goal is for all children to learn in the same place. On the other hand, children undergoing medical treatment must be treated as an exception. If that is so, then the need to maintain and develop a system that continues learning in parallel with treatment should be universally explored. It is necessary to continue to consider this question.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.082

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0050.009
Scholarly communication0.0050.005
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.376
Teacher spread0.341 · 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
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 venueInstitutional Repositories DataBase (IRDB)→Same topicChild and Adolescent Health→French-language works237,207→