Notice bibliographique
Résumé
This special issue is the third in a series to spotlight medical leadership and management.The series is an initiative of the World Federation of Medical Managers and is supported by the Emerald Publishing Group.In this third issue, we present papers from Canada, Wales, The Netherlands, Australia and the USA.Physician leadership in context is the strongest theme in papers exploring health reform, i.e. leadership development within medical disciplines, in multidisciplinary health-care teams and through international collaborations.Shared leadership, both in the context of intra-organization and inter-organizational activities, and the effective application of frameworks for developing leadership are strong supporting themes.Turner et al. explored the literature about discipline-specific curricula for leadership within medical specialty training programs.The author suggests that "evaluation to assess the impact of discipline-tailored curricula over more generic learning statements and programmes is required".Turner qualifies that statement, arguing that this evaluation should include examination of the effects of leadership training interventions on patientfocused outcomes.Busari et al. examined leadership in the context of interprofessional teams.Busari's use of focus groups and interviews to conclude leadership is shared and adaptive to fit team membership and circumstances.The author proposes a collaborative understanding of clinical leadership and advocates stronger leadership skills development among resident physicians in preparation for reform impact.Supporting this professional development theme, Dickson and Van Aerde described the development of the LEADS in a Caring Environment Capabilities Framework, developed and used in Canada, to stimulate systemwide leadership development.Many Canadian health organizations have endorsed LEADS as providing a common language and a set of standards for leadership.Examining the LEADS in a Caring Environment Framework is the subject of a further paper by Crawford et al. in which, it is identified through analysis of physician's selfreporting that they want more of the skills in the Canadian LEADS capabilities of Engage Others and Lead Self.They also identify the emergent capability titled Business Skillsmanagement skills; capabilities are articulated in greater detail in other frameworks.Insights into development of physician leadership capability are provided by Porter et al. who sought to investigate and understand how the Cleveland Clinic's Leading in Health-care (LHC) program aims to develop physician teamwork skills.Interviews support observations by others that there is a lack of formal physician education in teamwork during undergraduate and resident training; just as there is a growing trend to inter-disciplinary teams in the health-care setting.This finding validates the teamwork content of the Cleveland Clinic program.From Wales, is the paper by Phillips et al. exploring the features of a leadership training program delivered to encourage skill acquisition in early medical career development.The authors discuss initiation of the Welsh Clinical Leadership Fellowship (WCLF) program, informed by the Medical Leadership Competency Framework domains (i.e.developed by the NHS Institute for Innovation and Improvement) with the aim to equip aspiring medical leaders to build and lead improvements in healthcare delivery.Saxena et al. continued the theme of shared leadership by exploring the structural aspects (roles, responsibilities and reporting) of dyad leadership in one health-care organization.The authors examined the perceptions of physician leaders at different
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 | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| 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 | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| 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; les deux têtes enseignantes s’accordent sur ce qui est montré ici.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».