Duration of rural training during residency: rural family physicians prefer 6 months.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether rural family physicians thought they had received enough months of rural exposure during family medicine residency, how many months of rural exposure those who were satisfied with their training had had, and how many months of rural exposure those who were not satisfied with their training wanted. DESIGN: Mailed survey. SETTING: Rural Canada. PARTICIPANTS: Rural family physicians who had graduated between 1991 and 2000 from a Canadian medical school. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Respondents' opinions about whether their exposure to rural medicine during training had been adequate. RESULTS: Response rate was 59% (382/651). After excluding physicians who had not had Canadian family medicine residency training, 348 physicians remained, and of those, 58% thought they had had adequate rural exposure during residency. Median duration of rural training among those who thought they had had enough rural exposure was 6 months; median duration of rural exposure among those who thought they had not had enough was 2 months. Median duration of rural exposure desired by those who thought they had not had enough rural training was 6 months. Some physicians wanted much more than 6 months of rural training; for example, one quarter of those satisfied with their rural training had had 10 or more months of rural rotations. Fewer than 1% of respondents thought they had received too much rural training. There was no significant difference in number of months of rural training preferred by men and women (P = .94). One third of respondents had graduated from rural-focused family practice residency programs. Rural program graduates were more likely than non-rural program graduates to report that the duration of their rural training was adequate (84% vs 46%, P < .0001) and to report more mean months of rural exposure (8.9 vs 3.4; P < .0001). CONCLUSION: Typical rural family physicians prefer to have 6 months of rural exposure during residency. This finding is consistent with the recommendation of a College of Family Physicians of Canada committee that rural family medicine training programs offer at least 6 months of rural rotations. Almost half of rural family physicians wished they had had more rural training. Both rural-focused and non-rural-focused programs should consider providing opportunities for pursuing elective rotations in rural areas in addition to mandatory rotations if they want to respond to these preferences for training.
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 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,006 | 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 ».