MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W116455518

Entering the abyss: the resident's standard of care.

2011· article· en· W116455518 sur OpenAlexaffabout
Chantel Cabaj

Notice bibliographique

RevuePubMed · 2011
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineHealth Professions
ThématiqueMedical Malpractice and Liability Issues
Établissements canadiensUniversity of Alberta
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésBattleLegislationHealth careVaguenessMalpracticeContext (archaeology)LegislatureMedical malpracticeLawInterpretation (philosophy)Political sciencePsychologyMedicineHistory
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Introduction Medical residency is a legally complex and problematic issue. Uncertainty surrounding this topic is attributed to a lack of coherence and understanding in defining the resident. From one perspective, the resident is viewed as a physician. This view is based on the public's perception and the breadth of health care activities a resident is permitted to do. A polar view emerges when the realities of a residency program are considered. Given a resident's inexperience and limitations, a resident may also be defined as a medical trainee. The conceptual battle that exists when defining a resident is evident within medical malpractice jurisprudence. The resident's standard of care is the greatest victim of the battle, and it has become a tattered and tenuous concept. This paper will explore the confusion that surrounds the resident's standard of care. Guided by provincial legislation and policy, Part I examines and describes the evolution a physician experiences in becoming fully licensed. Part I also brings attention to the legislative vagueness that exists in Alberta; one source of the inconsistency surrounding the resident's standard of care. Part II provides overall context for the topic by outlining the legal principles that define the certified physician's standard of care. A three-pronged interpretation of the resident's standard of care is described in Part III. Part IV introduces an alternative approach to the minimum level of care expected of a resident. Lastly, Part V provides a personal opinion on the direction the resident's standard of care should take. I. The Student, Resident, and Licensed Physician: The Professional Evolution Becoming a fully licensed physician is a timely, multi-step process. Those who achieve this goal have progressed through three distinct phases: the medical student, the resident, and finally, the independent physician and! or specialist. (1) The resident's standard of care is best understood when complemented by a discussion that describes the progression of medical responsibility experienced by the physician. Defining each phase of a doctor's evolution requires consideration of appropriate legislation and guidelines. This paper will focus on Alberta's provincial legislation and guidelines, and, when necessary, policies from the Faculty of Medicine, University of Alberta. In Alberta, the field of medicine is a self-regulated industry that is governed by the Health Profession Act. (2) Section 46 of the Act mandates the registration of any individual who is competent in the practice of the profession and intends to provide professional services directly to the public, however specifically excludes students. (3) Regardless, the Act contemplates a medical student's registration with the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Alberta (the College). (4) Section 36(5) of the Act requires a regulated member to display a permit where the regulated member provides services. (5) A student enrolled ... in a program of studies provided for in the regulations is contemplated as such a regulated member. (6) Further, section 33(1) of the Act requires council to establish ... a regulated members register for one or more categories of members who provide services. (7) Included among the named categories created by council is an educational register. (8) Given this legislative framework, it is the in Alberta for medical students to register with the College from the outset of their medical degree. (9) This registration will be maintained for the entirety of the individual's medical career. Specific requirements and details relating to registration are outlined in the Physicians, Surgeons and Osteopaths Profession Regulation (Regulation). (10) Through the Regulation and various guidelines a legal understanding of the medical student, the resident, and the certified physician is formed. …

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,003
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Théorique ou conceptuel · Signal consensuel: Théorique ou conceptuel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,517
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,972

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0030,008
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0060,009
Communication savante0,0050,001
Science ouverte0,0010,003
Intégrité de la recherche0,0050,005
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0050,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,128
Tête enseignante GPT0,386
Écart entre enseignants0,259 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeThéorique ou conceptuel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2011
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revuePubMedMême sujetMedical Malpractice and Liability IssuesTravaux en français237 207