MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2263329944 · doi:10.1093/pch/12.4.287

Paediatric and otolaryngology cross-training

2007· article· en· W2263329944 sur OpenAlexaffabout
Ellen Wood

Notice bibliographique

RevuePaediatrics & Child Health · 2007
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueEar Surgery and Otitis Media
Établissements canadiensIzaak Walton Killam Health CentreDalhousie University
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésOtorhinolaryngologyMedicineFamily medicinePediatricsSurgery

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

I read, with interest, Dr Fabian's editorial (pages 283 to 284), as well as his two referenced studies (1,2), on the need for increased cross-training between paediatrics and otolaryngology. He performed two studies to document this need – one involving a survey of Canadian paediatric and otolaryngology program directors, and the other a survey of practicing paediatricians and otolaryngologists. Ten paediatric program directors responded to the three questions on the first survey. All 10 indicated that teaching by otolaryngologists would be beneficial for paediatric residents. Five of the programs already had a clinic experience, seven had lectures or rounds, and one program had an otolaryngology rotation. The areas identified by program directors as being important were airway problems, ear disease, hearing loss and sinus disease. Dr Fabian received responses to his second survey from 343 practicing paediatricians. All respondents felt that some training by otolaryngologists would be appropriate. Of these respondents, 72% reported receiving some formal training from otolaryngologists. The respondents were asked to choose which ear, nose and throat (ENT) topics should be taught by otolaryngologists during residency. Five topics were listed: airway problems, wax cleaning, ear disease, hearing loss and nasosinus disease. Each was chosen by at least 50% of the respondents. Dr Fabian concludes in his editorial that paediatric program directors and practicing paediatricians believe there is a deficiency in their otolaryngology training. This deficiency appeared to be less for recently certified paediatricians. He concludes that this has an impact on patient care. In his studies, he states that one-third of visits to a paediatrician are related to otitis media. The reference for this statement is an American study. General paediatricians in the United States have three years of residency and are considered primary care physicians (3), while in Canada we require four years of training, and our residents become consultant general paediatricians. According to the Canadian Paediatric Society Web site Caring for Kids , which is directed toward parents, paediatricians are described as “specialists in child and youth health”. They are said to “provide a wide variety of services for children, youth and their families. Their work with patients runs the gamut from taking care of a seriously ill newborn baby to treating a teenager who's been involved in a car accident”. Sounds like a tall order, especially when all of this knowledge must be gained in only four years of residency training! Amazingly, a survey of paediatricians (4), certified by the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada (RCPSC) between 1999 and 2003, reported that 96% believed they were “adequately” or “very well” trained for practice. Areas in which general paediatricians, in particular, reported “less than adequate” training were behavioural paediatrics, child development and child psychiatry. This may be because consultant paediatricians see a greater number of children with developmental or behavioural disorders, rather than otitis media and other acute infectious diseases, which, in Canada, are more likely to be treated by their primary care provider. However, Dr Fabian is correct in his assertion that paediatricians do require training and expertise in diagnosing and managing many otolaryngology disorders. The RCPSC, in their document Objectives of Training and Specialty Training Requirements in Pediatrics (5), lists four areas of knowledge, three skills (including curettage) and 17 common problems in otolaryngology (including all the topics identified by program directors and endorsed by practicing paediatricians) in which a paediatric resident is expected to be competent by the end of training. The RCPSC does not specify how the resident acquires this competency, or who should teach these skills. These competencies may be acquired in a variety of settings. Residents will see children with acute ENT conditions, such as otitis media, mastoiditis and airway obstruction, during their rotations in emergency medicine. In fact, they are more likely to encounter these conditions in the emergency room than in an ENT clinic. Many of the other areas of competency required by the RCPSC will be acquired during residents' other rotations, such as developmental paediatrics, in-patient general paediatrics, community paediatrics and paediatric surgery. Dr Fabian recommends a one-month clinic experience with a paediatric otolaryngologist, and that two weeks should be the minimum. In an ideal world, where residency training was unlimited, this would be possible. In the real world, with only four years of training (complicated by clinical time lost to academic half-days and post-call days), we have to be more flexible, because virtually every service and subspecialty wants more exposure to the residents. Paediatricians need these skills, and our residency programs need to provide an opportunity for residents to acquire them. We do need to work with our paediatric otolaryngology colleagues to ensure that the opportunities provided are of the best quality, if not the ideal quantity, to meet these needs.

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)0,010
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,040
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,018
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,052

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0100,040
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,002
Bibliométrie0,0020,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0020,003
Communication savante0,0040,005
Science ouverte0,0030,002
Intégrité de la recherche0,0180,021
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0090,004

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 Opus0,021
Tête enseignante GPT0,309
Écart entre enseignants0,289 · 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'étudeSans objet
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

Citations1
Publié2007
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revuePaediatrics & Child HealthMême sujetEar Surgery and Otitis MediaTravaux en français237 207