Perception about the Medical Internship at Federal University of Rio de Janeiro by the Service’s Preceptors in Primary Health Care: a Case Study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
ABSTRACT Introduction A preceptor is understood as a health care professional with an important role in introducing students and recently graduated doctors into professional practice. However, studies into medical teaching in the Family Health Strategy (FHS) have shown inadequacies in the quality, training and time spent by the tutors with students. In the municipality of Rio de Janeiro (RJ), the expansion of the FHS was belated, resulting in a vacuum of medical students being inserted into the network. Objective To understand the perception of Family Health Strategy physician preceptors regarding their performance with medical student interns from the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ). Methods This is a case study which employed a qualitative method and took place in the city of Rio de Janeiro (RJ). Semi-structured interviews were conducted between September 2011 and March 2012, with 15 preceptors from six Family Clinics receiving UFRJ medical interns. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, read and subjected to thematic content analysis, resulting in the establishment of five categories: encouragement and motivation; appreciation; training; real world versus academic world; teaching-service integration. Results The preceptors report that they feel recognized and encouraged by the students, but do not feel appreciated by the service coordinators, who fail to allocate adequate space and time to their preceptorship activities. A good relationship is established with both tutors and students. The preceptors would like to be trained in preceptorship and to strengthen their ties to UFRJ. They view their time with the students as both precious and challenging, because it stimulates them to rethink their care practices. They recognize in the internship the opportunity for students to gain practical experience of what has been learned in theory. Conclusion The preceptors’ work is supported by the good relationship established between preceptors, tutors and students but efforts are needed to value the professionals who perform this practice.
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 distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,005 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,005 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 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 tête enseignante, 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 ».