PD30-05 CURRENT PERSPECTIVES OF UROLOGY INVOLVEMENT IN RENAL TRANSPLANTATION: A SURVEY OF CANADIAN SENIOR RESIDENTS
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
You have accessJournal of UrologyTransplantation & Vascular Surgery I1 Apr 2014PD30-05 CURRENT PERSPECTIVES OF UROLOGY INVOLVEMENT IN RENAL TRANSPLANTATION: A SURVEY OF CANADIAN SENIOR RESIDENTS Jennifer Bjazevic and Thomas McGregor Jennifer BjazevicJennifer Bjazevic and Thomas McGregorThomas McGregor View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2014.02.2128AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookTwitterLinked InEmail INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES Medical advancements in transplantation have lead to increasing complexity of the field, and further surgical specialization. Consequently, the role of urology in renal transplantation has become highly variable with the growth of surgeons specialized in multi-organ transplant. However, renal transplantation remains a mandatory component of residency training, as determined by the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada. We determined the involvement of urology faculty and residents in renal transplantation, and perceptions of the role of urology in transplantation across Canada. METHODS An anonymous questionnaire was administered to all thirty-one final-year Canadian urology residents at the Queen’s Urology Examination Skills Training program (QUEST). The survey was devised to assess urological involvement and resident exposure to renal transplantation. Responses were closed ended and utilized a validated five-point Likert scale. Descriptive statistics and Pearson’s chi-squared test were used to analyze the responses and demonstrate correlations. RESULTS All residents completed the survey. Urologists were involved in performing renal transplant surgery at most training centers across Canada (77.4%). The majority of residents believed that urology should remain highly involved with transplant (77.4%), and that it should be a mandatory component of residency training (64.5%). There was a positive correlation between the involvement of urology in renal transplantation at a resident’s training centre, and the opinion that urology should continue to play an important role in this field (r=0.51, p=0.003). However, barely half of the residents (51.6%) felt they had sufficient exposure to transplant surgery. Only 41.9% would feel comfortable performing transplant surgery after residency, and these residents were involved in an average of 30 transplant surgeries and 16 laparoscopic donor nephrectomies. A minority of residents had plans for fellowship training (9.7%) or future careers (12.9%) involving renal transplant. CONCLUSIONS Renal transplantation remains a limited component of the majority of residency training programs in Canada. However, the number of residents intending to pursue fellowship training or a future career that involves transplant remains limited. Consequently, a strong exposure to renal transplant during urology residency training is vital to ensuring urology remains highly involved in renal transplantation. © 2014FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 191Issue 4SApril 2014Page: e775-e776 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2014Metrics Author Information Jennifer Bjazevic More articles by this author Thomas McGregor More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...
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 enseignantsNi 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.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,004 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,003 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 0,000 |
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.
score_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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».