Alternative Career Opportunities Available for Internationally Trained Physicians Living in Canada: An Overview of the Job Profiles
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: Internationally trained physicians (ITPs) or international medical graduates (IMGs) living in Canada are those who have received their academic and professional training outside of Canada or the USA. Current rules and regulations have made it extremely difficult for IMGs to get the license to practice in Canada as a physician regardless of their citizenship status and level of training. After going through a highly competitive process, approximately only 15% of Alberta IMG applicants obtain a residency position based on the number of seats allocated to IMGs via AIMGP (263 eligible candidates; 39 seats). This bottleneck situation and the time and cost of re-applying gradually increase frustration among IMGs. Our interest was to look at the employment situation of IMGs in Canada and what viable pathways existed for them if interested in pursuing an alternative career in health. Our research was conducted to identify the factors that IMGs took into consideration when exploring an alternative career and to identify suitable alternative career pathways available for IMGs within Canada in order to advise them accordingly. Methods: To begin with, we conducted a survey on IMGs regarding their interests in and preferences for alternative careers. Keeping the survey results in mind, we searched for job advertisements and systematically reviewed job descriptions and their qualifications (i.e. regulated versus non-regulated). We also conducted focus groups to extract the key decision-making factors for IMGs in order to identify the alternative jobs that match their interest and skills. Results: In total, we have identified 192 unique job positions comprising 47 NOC codes that could be suitable for IMGs seeking to begin an alternative career based on the short, intermediate, and long-term goals. These jobs primarily fall into two different categories: clinical (35.42%) and non-clinical (64.58%) jobs. Interestingly, we have found that around 7.35% of clinical and 29.84% of non-clinical job categories do not require any sort of license or approval from any regulatory bodies. Although most other jobs require a certain level of training, certificate, or license from the respective licensing authorities, obtaining those regulatory approvals is more tangible compared to the license to practice as a physician. Strikingly, there are approximately 17.71%, 51.04%, 29.17% and 2.08% unique categories that fall into the entry, middle, and senior-level job positions. We have further classified these job categories according to the job searching preferences of IMGs and collected information on how to qualify for these jobs. Conclusion: Although more work in this area is needed to integrate IMGs with the job market, we expect that our findings and resources will help IMGs decide on alternative career pathways.
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 | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,004 | 0,006 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,006 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 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 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 ».