STEM Women: Dame Clare Marx [RIP]

Pablo Picasso. Science and Charity. Barcelona, [March-April of] 1897. Oil on canvas 197 x 249.5 cm.
Museu Picasso, Barcelona. Donation Pablo Picasso, 1970. MPB 110.046. Museu Picasso, Barcelona.
Fotografía, Miquel Coll © Sucesión Pablo Picasso, VEGAP, Madrid 2020

 INDIVIDUAL
|

 INTERPERSONAL    :     SCIENCES               

HUMANISTIC --------------------------------------  MECHANISTIC      

SOCIOLOGY  :   POLITICAL 

|

GROUP

Clare  intelligence ...	physical contact, touch ... good surgical hands ...
Marx ... ability to talk to patients	Dame

Dame Clare Marx "First woman to be elected president of the Royal College of Surgeons who sought to root out sexism and expand surgical training ... A charismatic colleague taught her the three qualities of a successful surgeon: intelligence, good surgical hands and an ability to talk to patients."

"Marx said Picasso's Science and Charity emphasises
'the importance of physical contact' between doctor and patient."

Register, Obituaries, The Times, November 30, 2022, p.53.

See also: 'Arts'

Relatedness and Similarity - in The Health Career Model

How can we demonstrate the basis for the axes, 'found' conceptual structures and conceptual clustering in Hodges' model?

UMLS::Similarity Web Interface (measuring pairwise similarity and relatedness of medical concepts)

Some results and definitions obtained from the above.

Results:

The similarity of person (C0027361 ) and patient (C0030705 ) using Lin (lin) is 0.85.

Using:    SAB :: include MSH
    REL :: include PAR/CHD

The similarity of person (C0027361 ) and patient (C0030705 ) using Conceptual Distance (cdist) is 0.5.

Using:    SAB :: include MSH
    REL :: include PAR/CHD

The similarity of person (C0027361 ) and patient (C0030705 ) using Resnik (res) is 1.6384.

Using:    SAB :: include MSH
    REL :: include PAR/CHD

The similarity of person (C0027361 ) and patient (C0030705 ) using Jiang & Conrath (jcn) is 1.7295.

Using:    SAB :: include MSH
    REL :: include PAR/CHD

The similarity of person (C0027361 ) and patient (C0030705 ) using Path Length (path) is 0.5.

Using:    SAB :: include MSH
    REL :: include PAR/CHD

The similarity of person (C0027361 ) and patient (C0030705 ) using Wu & Palmer (wup) is 0.8.

Using:    SAB :: include MSH
    REL :: include PAR/CHD

The similarity of person (C0027361 ) and patient (C0030705 ) using Nguyen & Al-Mubaid (nam) is 0.2038.

Using:    SAB :: include MSH
    REL :: include PAR/CHD

The similarity of person (C0027361 ) and patient (C0030705 ) using Random Measure (random) is 0.5703.

Using:    SAB :: include MSH
    REL :: include PAR/CHD

The similarity of person (C0027361 ) and patient (C0030705 ) using Leacock & Chodorow (lch) is 2.9957.

Using:    SAB :: include MSH
    REL :: include PAR/CHD

--

The relatedness of individual (C0027361 ) and group (C1257890 ) using Vector Measure (vector) is 0.7869.

Using:    SABDEF :: include UMLS_ALL
    RELDEF :: include CUI/PAR/CHD/RB/RN

The relatedness of individual (C0027361 ) and group (C1257890 ) using Adapted Lesk (lesk) is 9584.

Using:    SABDEF :: include UMLS_ALL
    RELDEF :: include CUI/PAR/CHD/RB/RN

--

The relatedness of self (C0036588 ) and group (C1257890 ) using Adapted Lesk (lesk) is 263.

Using:    SABDEF :: include UMLS_ALL
    RELDEF :: include CUI/PAR/CHD/RB/RN

The relatedness of self (C0036588 ) and group (C1561557 ) using Vector Measure (vector) is 0.4054.

Using:    SABDEF :: include UMLS_ALL
    RELDEF :: include CUI/PAR/CHD/RB/RN

Definitions:

individual (C0027361)

HL7V3.0 : A living subject of the species homo sapiens.

NCI : Human beings in general.

NCI : A human being.

NCI_BRIDG : A human being.

MSH : Persons as individuals (e.g., ABORTION APPLICANTS) or as members of a group (e.g., HISPANIC AMERICANS). It is not used for members of the various professions (e.g., PHYSICIANS) or occupations (e.g., LIBRARIANS) for which OCCUPATIONAL GROUPS is available.

individual (C0237401)

individual (C3245468)

HL7V3.0 : Description:Person as specified by coverage policy or program.

HL7V3.0 : Description:The level of coverage under the policy or program is available to an individual.

HL7V3.0 : Description: A role played by a party covered under a policy as the policy holder. An individual may be either a person or an organization.
Note: The party playing the role of an individual insured is not a claimant in the sense conveyed by the RoleClassCoveredParty CLAIM (claimant). However, a named insured may make a claim under a policy, e.g., a party that is the named insured and policy holder under a comprehensive automobile insurance policy may become the claimant for coverage under that policy if injured in an automobile accident and there is no liable third party. In the case of an individual insured making a claim, a role type code INSCLM (insured claimant) subtypes the class to indicate that an individual insured has filed a claim for a loss.
Example: The individual insured under a comprehensive automobile, disability, or property and casualty policy that is the policy holder.

HL7V3.0 :

self (C0036588)

HL7V3.0 : The "same" roleclass asserts an identity between playing and scoping entities: that they are in fact instances of the same entity and, in the case of discrepancies (e.g different DOB, gender), that one or both are in error.
Usage:
playing and scoping entities must have same classcode, but need not have identical attributes or values.
Example:
a provider registry maintains sets of conflicting demographic data for what is reported to be the same individual.

NCI : The individual as the object of his own reflective consciousness.

HL7V3.0 : The relationship that a person has with his or her self.

self (C1551994)

HL7V3.0 : Covered party is the policy holder. Also known as the subscriber.

See also:

WordNet::Similarity

This is a Perl module that implements a variety of semantic similarity and relatedness measures based on information found in the lexical database WordNet. In particular, it supports the measures of Resnik, Lin, Jiang-Conrath, Leacock-Chodorow, Hirst-St.Onge, Wu-Palmer, Banerjee-Pedersen, and Patwardhan-Pedersen. 

n.b. While Hodges' model was created for application in health and social care contexts it can be applied generally.

There Are Four P's in "Hodges model"

People are not very good at multitasking (surprise, surprise!).

In conversation people discuss one topic or thing at a time. If the subject alters, the change of context is indicated through a verbal redirect "There's something else...", or a gesture. When writing, paragraphs help structure our prose. If there are several tasks to perform, then it really is a case of "one at a time thank you!". Although, as the saying goes though - where there's a will, there's a way - hence the constant emphasis on EFFECTIVE team working.

Reality is of course rarely presented to us in discrete contextualised packets. Experience is not always filtered to the extent that only information relating to one context is delivered to our senses. Can you imagine the informational equivalent of the IV drip? (Virtual reality?) And yet this is what our brains are tasked with, to select, sort and prioritise....

There are exceptions:- the arrival of news about an impending birth or sudden illness or accident. Then informationally speaking the world is ordered and yet a personal chaos ensues. We move like the wind...

So usually several contexts are knotted and presented together. Predicatable consequences may follow; confusion, a task may be left incomplete, risk becomes a dance partner, although at first this passes unnoticed as we are still going with the flow. A key message becomes garbled, the meaning fails to get through.

The amount of information needed by a team is erm... well - a big number! The demand for data and information on just process and policy is monumental. Project management tools are no guarantee against satisficing. The volume of information and human fallibility can fracture discipline and has us saying "that’s far enough", or "that will do for now".

So without untying the contexts, unwrapping the complexity - key parts of the picture may be missing. Sometimes even when the picture is complete, we forget about the frame and picture hook? Just which way is 'up' if that matters a[r]t all?

In the same way that items of data can have meta-data (that is data about data), could it be that Hodges’ care domains have their own meta-terms of reference? These terms characterise each of the care domains and their respective contents. In the same way that process is integral to project management, perhaps there are terms that can contribute to the overall effectiveness and scope of Hodges’ model? What I have in mind is the following:

Purpose Process
Practice Policy

Surely this rather complicates matters? For an artist this would actually prove a very limited palette. And yet this is a common strategy – reduce the palette to four colours. This greatly affects the 'masterpiece' assuring discipline and influencing style before the paint is even amb(r)ushed.

For project managers armed with their PM tools the 4Ps really are a handful, but well worth getting to grips with.