A week long “pep” talk – initial and 2–3-year longitudinal data on the Ottawa Psychiatry Enrichment Program (OPEP)
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Background Recruitment to psychiatry as a career has been challenging in Canada and abroad despite the known shortage and increasing burden of psychiatric issues globally. Deterrents to choosing psychiatry as a career include its negative stigma and paucity of knowledge about the field. The study goal was to evaluate the Ottawa Psychiatry Enrichment Program (OPEP), a one-week extracurricular program about psychiatry as a career for 1st and 2nd year medical students. We hypothesized OPEP would improve students’ attitudes towards psychiatry, and positive changes would be sustained 2–3 years later following their residency match. We hypothesized there would be a high recruitment of OPEP attendees to psychiatry programs. Methods 1st and 2nd year medical students from Canada applied to OPEP. Attendees completed the Attitudes Towards Psychiatry Questionnaire (ATP-30) at three times: before OPEP (PreOPEP), after OPEP (PostOPEP) and after their Canadian Residency Matching Service (CaRMs) match 2–3 years later. OPEP ATP-30 scores were compared to third-year student ATP-30 scores before and after their psychiatry rotation. Data were analysed using Friedman non-parametric ANOVA and post hoc testing by either Wilcoxon rank sum test, Wilcoxon matched pairs signed rank test, or parametric Welch independent t-test as appropriate. Effect sizes of group mean differences were calculated using Cohen’s “d”. Results Between 2017–2018, 29/53 Canadian applicants were selected for OPEP. 100%, 93.1% and 75.8% of OPEP students completed the PreOPEP, PostOPEP, and CaRMs ATP-30 surveys respectively. 43% of OPEP attendees matched to psychiatry. PostOPEP ATP-30 scores (mean = 133, median = 137, SD = 10.6) were significantly higher than PreOPEP ATP-30 (mean score = 121, median = 122, SD = 9.3, p < 0.001) and CaRMS ATP-30 (mean = 126, median = 127, SD = 12.3, p < 0.02) scores. OPEP effect size on ATP-30 scores was large (d = 1.2) but decreased 2–3 years later (p = 0.078, d = 0.44). 97/202 students completed the ATP-30 before and after their psychiatry rotation (clerkship). Clerkship effect size on improvement in ATP-30 was moderate (d = 0.39). There was a non-significant difference between OPEP CaRMS ATP-30 and post clerkship ATP-30 scores (median 127 vs 121, p = 0.056). Conclusions OPEP ameliorated attitudes toward Psychiatry, but improvement deteriorated longitudinally. Strategies for program design, and innovations to boost/retain improvements during clerkship years are discussed.
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 | 0,002 | 0,005 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,005 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,005 | 0,002 |
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 ».