MétaCan
Menu
← Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2410194732

Training in Substance-Related and Addictive Disorders, Part 2: Updated Curriculum Guidelines.

2015· article· en· W2410194732 sur OpenAlexaffabout
David Crockford, Gilles Fleury, Robert Milin, Leslie Buckley, Dara A. Charney, Tony P. George, Nady el‐Guebaly

Notice bibliographique

RevuePubMed · 2015
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueSubstance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
Établissements canadiensCentre for Addiction and Mental HealthMcGill UniversityMcGill University Health CentreFoothills Medical CentreRoyal Ottawa Mental Health CentreToronto Western HospitalMontfort Hospital
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésAddictionPsychiatrySubstance abuseAddiction medicineCurriculumMental healthMedicinePsychologySubstance useMilitary psychiatryClinical psychology
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Training in the management of substance-related and addictive disorders in psychiatry has been disproportionately limited in psychiatric residency training programs, compared with other major psychiatric disorders. Few psychiatry residents received training in addictions unless elective experiences were pursued. Moreover, a lack of experienced faculty, negative attitudes toward addicted patients, lack of adequate curriculum and poorly defined educational goals and requirements have been identified as factors leading to the lack of training in substance-related and addictive disorders.1,2 With the further recognition that treatment outcomes improve when patients with concurrent addiction and mental disorders receive integrated care, rather than separate treatment in a sequential or parallel manner,3–8 it becomes increasingly evident that the knowledge, attitudes and diagnostic– management skills for all new psychiatrists will need to become more sophisticated in the area of substance-related and addictive disorders. In 1997, the initial Curriculum Guidelines for Residency Training of Psychiatrists in Substance-Related Disorders was published by the Canadian Psychiatric Association (CPA) as a position paper.9 The stated goals of those guidelines were as follows, to: improve the knowledge, skills, and attitudes of psychiatrists about substance-related disorders to a level comparable to other mental disorders; ensure better evaluation and treatment of alcohol and other substance abusers; foster recognition of the impact of comorbid substance abuse on the treatment and evolution of other physical and psychiatric conditions; prevent marginalization and excessive demedicalization of clinical services to substance abusers; ensure that psychiatrists develop an understanding of the spectrum of health care systems providing services to substance abusers; and foster advanced training and subspecialization of a greater number of psychiatrists to develop clinical services, teaching, and research in substance abuse.p 1–2 However, without these proposed guidelines9 being incorporated into the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada (RCPSC) Specialty Training Requirements (STR) in Psychiatry,10 curriculum changes were left up to individual programs to voluntarily implement, and relatively little change occurred. To attempt to begin to address the training deficiency in substance-related and addictive disorders, in 2007, the RCPSC released the new STR in Psychiatry10 outlining more specific expectations in training for psychiatry residents. While the Objectives of Training (OTR) in Psychiatry mentions alcohol and other substance use disorders (SUDs), it does not currently include gambling disorder or conditions for further study (for example, Internet gaming disorder), which we, the authors of this position paper, would recommend including to reflect the changes in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5), terminology and trends in addiction treatments. Proficiencies in substance-related and addictive disorders are currently part of the training requirements for all Canadian psychiatry residents who began their training as of July 1, 2009, to be realized during the five years of residency training, with no less than the equivalent of a one-month clinical experience evaluated separately from other rotations occurring sometime in the postgraduate years (PGYs) 2 to 5. Although it is unlikely that a one-month experience would fully allow the resident to realize the proficiencies expected, the one-month experience, coupled with seminars, should provide an adequate foundation for residents in addictions to be augmented by further training experiences and ongoing continuing medical education (CME) to meet the requirements. The OTR–STR as they apply to training in substance-related and addictive disorders include the following: Supervised experience in the treatment of patients with substance-related and addictive disorders in various settings. A learning portfolio or log should be maintained and reviewed by the program director. This experience must be undertaken as a discrete rotation of no less than one month or incorporated as a longitudinal experience (at any time during PGY-2 to -5) of no less than the equivalent of one month. This must be documented and evaluated separately from other rotations. Availability of a selective rotation in substance-related and addictive disorders of no less than three months, but preferably six months, during senior psychiatric residency training (PGY-4 to -5), to develop advanced knowledge (definition in Table 1) in addiction psychiatry. Table 1 RCPSC knowledge and skills definitions38

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)0,008
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,016
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: Autre · Signal consensuel: Autre
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,124
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,247

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0080,016
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,001
Bibliométrie0,0050,004
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,001
Communication savante0,0020,002
Science ouverte0,0030,002
Intégrité de la recherche0,0030,004
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0170,009

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 Opus0,075
Tête enseignante GPT0,286
Écart entre enseignants0,211 · 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
GenreAutre

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

En bref

Citations18
Publié2015
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revuePubMed→Même sujetSubstance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes→Travaux en français237 207→