110: Ethics Learning Needs of Paediatric Residents: A View from All Sides
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Ethics and professionalism education is a required component of paediatric residency training. However, a dearth of established curricula persists and there is no consensus as to the topics that should be included. Significant barriers exist in the form of curricular crowding, making it imperative that educators prioritize residents' ethics learning needs. Previous studies have been limited by the use of trainees' self-reported needs alone. This is the first study to investigate the ethics learning needs of paediatric residents using a 360° assessment. Our hypothesis was that paediatricians and/or allied health care professionals (HCPs) would identify ethics learning needs not appreciated by trainees. To identify and prioritize paediatric residents' ethics learning needs using a 360° survey-based assessment. To determine if differences exist between paediatric residents' ethics learning needs as perceived by residents, paediatricians and allied HCPs. Paediatric residents, respiratory therapists (RTs), registered nurses (RNs) and paediatricians working at a university children's hospital rated the importance of twelve ethics themes as learning needs for trainees using a Likert scale. Kruskal-Wallis tests were used to compare the ratings of importance for each theme between the four groups of respondents. Pairwise comparisons were conducted using Dunn's procedure with a Bonferroni correction. Response rates were 65%, 70%, 57% and 47% for residents (n=15), paediatricians (n=30), RTs (n=8) and RNs (n=71), respectively. The rated importance of seven of twelve ethics themes differed significantly between the four groups. Paediatricians rated five ethics themes as significantly more important than did RTs/RNs. Residents rated genetic screening/testing as significantly more important than RTs/RNs. A rank order list of ethics themes was generated for each group of respondents based on the percentage of respondents in each group rating the ethics theme as very important. Four ethics themes were in the top six for all groups of respondents. These results provide an interprofessional assessment of paediatric residents' perceived ethics learning needs. High priority ethics topics were identified, allowing for a targeted curriculum in the context of limited instructional time. Contrary to our hypothesis, there were no instances where trainees rated an ethics learning need as less important than did paediatricians or allied HCPs.
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 | 0,004 | 0,012 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,003 | 0,003 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,003 | 0,003 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 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 ».