Has the Middle-Level Anaesthesia Manpower Training Program of the West African College of Surgeons Fulfilled its Objectives?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An audit of the West African College of Surgeons' middle-level Diploma in Anaesthesia program was carried out to determine the current status of the diplomates. Using the West African College of Surgeons' database, social media and personal communications, the current status of Diploma in Anaesthesia graduates spanning 20 years was determined. A total of 303 (97%) out of 311 of graduates were traced. Eighty percent were still practising anaesthesia, while 5% were now in other disciplines. Two hundred and four (67.3%) still resided in West Africa (183 in Nigeria, 50 in Ghana, one in Sierra Leone), while 69 (22.7%) were abroad: 35 (11.5%) in the United Kingdom, 21 (6.9%) in the United States of America and four (1.3%) in Canada. More Ghanaian than Nigerian graduates had emigrated (41 vs 14%, respectively). Only 9% of diplomates remained in rural communities (as originally envisaged), while 31% were now consultants (as fellows) and 30% were registrars in fellowship training. These findings indicate that most diplomates moved on to acquire further qualifications and a significant proportion migrated. The program did not appear to have achieved the objectives of meeting rural middle-level manpower needs in anaesthesia as envisaged. It has, however, boosted the recruitment drive for residency training in anaesthesia. Perhaps a less migrant cadre such as nurses may better serve this function if recruited into a suitably designed training program in countries desiring to use middle-level manpower in anaesthesia.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".