The physician–scientist in Canadian psychiatry
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study was to determine whether physician-scientists in psychiatry in Canada are in decline, as was reported for medicine overall during the 1990s in the United States. DESIGN: Federal databases were searched to study grant applications in the area of mental health submitted by physician-scientists compared with PhD-scientists for the period 1985-2001. A survey of Canadian Residency Training Program Directors was carried out for the graduating class of 2000. SETTING: The Canadian publicly funded university system. PARTICIPANTS: Applicants to the Medical Research Council of Canada and its successor, the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, for operating grant support and Residency Training Program Directors. INTERVENTIONS: None. OUTCOME MEASURES: Comparison over time between MD and PhD applicants regarding the number of grant applications submitted, the proportion of applications funded and the number of new applications submitted, with separation of applications submitted to a predominantly "biomedical" peer review committee and to a predominantly "clinical research" peer review committee. The survey obtained information about a number of variables related to research training. RESULTS: The situation for physician-scientists in psychiatry in Canada appeared remarkably similar to general findings in US studies. Relative to PhD applicants, fewer grant proposals were being made by physicians (paired t16 = 7.08, p < 0.001) and, in consequence, fewer proposals were funded. The proportion of proposals funded was similar for MD and PhD applicants (paired t16 = 0.27, p = 0.79). Grant applications made to the predominantly biomedical committee were more likely to be funded than applications to the committee with an orientation toward clinical research (paired t7 = 5.53, p < 0.001). Applications by PhD-scientists to the biomedical committee showed the largest increase over time and were the most successful. From the survey of graduating classes, close to one-third of residents had authored or co-authored a publication during residency. Only 7% were proceeding to research fellowship training. The remuneration available for fellowship training was about one-third of what graduating classmates could expect to earn in the first year of practice. CONCLUSIONS: Quantitative data indicate that physician-scientists in psychiatry in Canada are experiencing the same pressures and challenges as physician-scientists in the United States. A plan of action tailored to the needs of the psychiatric community in Canada needs to be developed.
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 | 0,006 | 0,028 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,004 | 0,010 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,013 | 0,004 |
| Communication savante | 0,004 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,004 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,013 | 0,001 |
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 ».