48 Evaluation without representation: Paediatric residents perspectives on CBME
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Background Paediatrics transitioned in 2021 to Competence By Design (CBD), a postgraduate education model spearheaded by the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada (Royal College). CBD replaced a time-based training system with one based on competencies demonstrated through regular observations of trainee performance. Although intended to be learner-centered, resident voices have been underrepresented in CBD’s design. Objectives We sought to (1) understand how paediatric residents perceived CBD as impacting their education and evaluation, and (2) explore their ideas to improve its implementation. Design/Methods We compared three Canadian postgraduate paediatric residency programs. First, we reviewed Royal College and program-specific documents regarding CBD to understand local and national priorities for its implementation. Program directors and local education leads were then interviewed to understand local priorities and implementation practices at these programs. Lastly, we conducted interviews with paediatric residents that began residency the year that CBD was launched. We used reflexive, inductive analysis to analyze their perspectives on how CBD has affected their education and develop learner-informed recommendations for improvement. Results We interviewed six program directors and CBD leads. Identified programmatic benefits included improved trainee surveillance, facilitated curriculum change, and competency committees. Challenges included untrained faculty, workplace-based assessment tensions, and administrative burden on residents and staff. Subsequent interviews with ten paediatric residents demonstrated CBD as having limited benefit to their education, leading to a checklist mentality of EPA completion and disengagement with the CBD system. These perceptions were influenced by (1) administrative burden, (2) poor quality feedback from disengaged staff with limited coaching experience, and (3) a lack of collaborative communication between the residents, their programs, and the Royal College. Residents suggested improvements, including: decreasing the number of assessments to alleviate time burden on both residents and faculty; implementing formal coaching instruction for residents and staff; and improving dialogue between Royal College, competency committees, and residents and physician evaluators to build buy-in with the system and facilitate continuing process improvement. Conclusion If we are to effectively adapt postgraduate educational systems to equip learners with the skills to meet the needs of the societies they serve, centering resident voices in curricular revision is paramount to maximize learner buy-in, minimize unintended administrative burden, and guide the development of necessary institutional supports (e.g., formal coaching) to ensure successful system transformation.
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 | 0,026 | 0,054 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,009 | 0,008 |
| Communication savante | 0,006 | 0,003 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,009 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,005 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,005 | 0,001 |
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 ».