MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2921233762 · doi:10.1093/crival/vaz009

Collaborative ASCP/USCAP Program Provides Trainees with Education on The Hidden Curriculum of Pathology and Laboratory Management

2019· article· en· W2921233762 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Alexander Feldman, Melissa Straub Hogan

Notice bibliographique

RevueCritical Values · 2019
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineEngineering
ThématiqueBiomedical and Engineering Education
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedical educationCurriculumMedical laboratoryMedicineMedical physicsPsychologyPathologyPedagogy

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Dr. Feldman Dr. Straub Hogan In an era where more physicians are finding themselves as “accidental administrators,” pathology trainees need to be prepared to be the next high-level officers of private groups, large hospitals and beyond. With this in mind, ASCP and USCAP collaborated to create the program Just Say Know! From Mentoring to High Performance. This program was the second meeting of its kind, following the successful 2017 ASCP/USCAP collaboration: 2020 Vision. Participation in Just Say Know! was a competitive process in which applicants submitted resumes, personal statements and letters of recommendation to be considered. After reviewing more than 60 applicant submissions, an ASCP/USCAP scholarship selection committee chose winners who were each awarded a grant of $1,500 to cover the cost of travel and lodging. The meeting was held at USCAP’s Linder Learning Center and Powers-Sanchez Interactive Center in Palm Springs, California. Among the attendees were 28 pathology trainees from 18 states and Canada, including leaders within ASCP and USCAP, pathology social media gurus, chief residents and physician-scientists. This diverse group of individuals each brought unique perspectives and experiences to the weekend. Trainees were given the opportunity to interact with industry experts who shared personal experiences and insights. Additionally, there was combined hands-on skills training and applications via case studies and exercises. The weekend program encompassed areas of leadership, management, business and policy, and change. The first day’s initial events focused on leadership. Drs. Blair Holladay and David Kaminsky introduced the residents to their personal perspectives on how important these collaborative meetings can be and provided a great foundation to start the meeting. Emotional intelligence and empathic communication were brought to the forefront as essential qualities in leadership, and attendees were able to take a more introspective view on how they communicate with others. The ASCP Center for Global Health presented case studies in which attendees discussed health disparities, how to address these issues and how to implement change in these ever-changing environments. The afternoon session continued with essential management skills and topics, including mentoring, quality and patient safety, and problem solving, challenging trainees to troubleshoot issues they will encounter in their future practices. The first day ended with an immersive experience mixing art and leadership by visiting and discussing the downtown Palm Springs art installation “Babies on the Move.” The second day started by focusing on external factors within the business environment and public policy that will shape the future practice of pathology. This included presentations and case-based discussions on future economic valuation and placement of diagnostic services as well as test utilization and laboratory stewardship. This was followed by a skills development course on the art of negotiating. The final session of the meeting focused on change management skills and rounded out an exciting meeting for trainees, one that will assuredly provide a great foundation for success in their future careers. I recently caught up with attendee, Dr. Melissa Hogan, a PGY-3 at Vanderbilt University Medical Center and asked about her experiences with the program: Melissa Hogan (MH): I’ve always been a person who has been intrigued by leadership. Knowing that these two great organizations wanted to create a program to help future leaders better do their jobs seemed like the perfect way to learn this information. It made me really take a more detailed look at my leadership style and things I need to improve on moving forward. I guess the short answer to your question would be: Why wouldn’t I apply!? MH: It may sound funny, but for me it was meeting everyone. We had so many diverse people coming from different backgrounds who each found medicine at different times in their lives. But despite all of that, everyone was there to enhance their education in very important ways. It was also a great way to network, meeting people I follow on social media but whom I’ve never met in person before. If I had to pick one program from the first day, though, it would have to be the art and leadership discussion. Realizing that medicine, leadership and really everything we do as pathologists and lab professionals is truly an art (and not just how much reagent goes into a particular chemical reaction) is really important. I value being artistic in my free time, and so for me, it was a great way to enjoy two things I truly love. MH: That’s pretty tough, but I would have to say it was the discussion on academic versus community practice. I myself am trying to figure out which avenue I will eventually travel down and hearing the perspectives of physicians from both ends of the spectrum was very informative. MH: I think, first and foremost, educating yourself on topics like this is really important. Programs like Just Say Know! are a way to open doors, open your mind and think a little differently. I was surprised how open and honest the faculty was about things that were happening in their own lives, how they tackled them, and how they use similar problem solving skills every day in their respective scopes of practice. We have so many opportunities as medical professionals, and we need to take advantage of programs like this to make us our best selves and the best doctors we can be.

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 enseignants

Ni 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.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Théorique ou conceptuel · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,641
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,238

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

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.

Tête enseignante Opus0,004
Tête enseignante GPT0,238
Écart entre enseignants0,234 · 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 tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeThéorique ou conceptuel
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

Citations0
Publié2019
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueCritical ValuesMême sujetBiomedical and Engineering EducationTravaux en français237 207