Positive and negative professionalism experiences of genetic counseling students in the United States and Canada
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Many aspects of genetic counseling training programs have been examined over the years. However, no study has explored professional or unprofessional behaviors genetic counseling graduate students experience during their training, and how these behaviors influence satisfaction with their training. This exploratory study examined students' experiences with program leaders, instructors, supervisors, and other trainees. Specific experiences included actions of favoritism, bias, negativity, abuse of power, and examples of positive role modeling. A survey was sent to all members of the National Society of Genetic Counselors and program directors in order to reach graduates of Accreditation Council for Genetic Counseling (ACGC)-accredited programs from 2015-2019 who were eligible to participate. Responses to questions relating to demographics, satisfaction with graduate education, behaviors experienced or seen during graduate school, and reporting of inappropriate behaviors were collected and analyzed. Results demonstrated that 95% of the genetic counseling graduates were highly satisfied with their graduate education and those who experienced inappropriate behaviors during their training were somewhat less satisfied (p = .04). Individuals who felt more prepared by their graduate education were more satisfied with their graduate education (p < .01). Being publicly embarrassed or humiliated, being made to feel like a burden in clinic, or being subjected to negative or offensive behavior based on their personal beliefs or personal characteristics (excluding areas of gender, race/ethnicity, or sexual orientation) were all negatively associated with satisfaction (all p < .04). We conclude that this survey could serve as a "Genetic Counseling Training Experiences Assessment" which could be incorporated into annual evaluations required by the ACGC. Implementation of this assessment would enhance the current evaluations of genetic counseling training programs and provide important information regarding student experiences during their training.
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 | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 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 ».