R1 (Resident Advocacy Project) Flexible and Enhanced Learning with our RICHER Partners: Reciprocal Partnerships between Medical Students and Equity-Deserving Communities to Promote Vaccine Access and Teach Health Advocacy
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Rationale and Objectives The University of British Columbia provides medical students in years 1, 2, and 4 with protected time to explore the CanMEDs competencies in student-directed service, education, and research through the Flexible and Enhanced Learning (FLEX) program. Six FLEX students in the past three years have engaged in reciprocal partnerships with the Responsive, Intersectoral Community Child Health Education and Research group (RICHER). RICHER is a consortium of interdisciplinary healthcare providers, resource centres, and community members working across sectors and systems who serve equity-deserving children, youth, and families in Vancouver’s inner-city. Students develop leadership, health advocacy, and collaboration competencies through mentorship and co-learning with the RICHER team and community partners. For example, students have partnered to promote and amplify vaccine equity, knowledge of children’s and youth’s rights, food security, and social-emotional learning. Project Description For each FLEX project, community members identify local priorities. They conduct needs assessments and environmental scans. Students complete project proposals, ethics board and grant applications, and elicit iterative community feedback. Students collect data and communicate findings to stakeholders, including community members and RICHER clinicians. RICHER further amplifies community voices by sharing FLEX project results with local and provincial decision-makers, resulting in policy change and resource mobilization. Projects are evaluated qualitatively by stakeholders. For example, during the COVID-19 lockdown, many inner-city families faced barriers accessing COVID vaccines. The Downtown Eastside neighbourhood had some of the lowest vaccination rates in the province. Outcomes FLEX students surveyed 122 community members and found that 89 (73%) community members experienced a significant barrier to accessing COVID vaccines, such as: no access to technology or ID required to register or book an appointment, no access to transportation to a vaccine clinic, or trauma associated with accessing healthcare or injections. The RICHER team was able to respond to these findings by authoring a letter to the local health authority, who mobilized a pop-up vaccine clinic at an accessible, local community centre using the principles of brokered trust. Discussion/Future Directions This vaccine equity project has set a precedence for accessible care and created a model for future vaccine clinics to provide protection against viruses like influenza. FLEX students and hospital staff learned from Indigenous Elders and community members how to use the medicine wheel in the context of wholistic healthcare. As health advocates, FLEX students learned to ask, “who are we not seeing and why?” and learned how to write motivational letters to changemakers.
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 | 0,019 | 0,016 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,009 | 0,003 |
| Communication savante | 0,005 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,003 | 0,016 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,003 | 0,005 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,036 | 0,007 |
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 ».