48. MD/MBA: A useful combination in Canadian specialty medicine?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The practice of medicine has changed greatly in the face of rapidly changing technology, limited or controlled funding and heightened patient expectations. In the early 1990s curricula for the management education of residents appeared. The Social Needs Working Group identified competencies grouped under the manager role as a major weakness of residency training in Canada. Recent graduates in the United States and Canada found they were unprepared for the increased responsibility of office management, contract negotiation and healthcare administration. The popularity of masters degrees in business administration (MBA) has grown exponentially. At the same time the number of medical professionals completing MBAs in Canada is still small by comparison, as opposed to the United States where MD-MBAs are more prevalent. The utility of MBAs is still in question in Canada. The effects on practice patterns of Canadian residents completing an MBA is also unknown. The following workshop aims to allow participants to experience the format of case-based learning applied in many MBA programs. The cases will also highlight the unique approach a business mind can bring to current issues within medicine. The usefulness of an MBA will also be explored through small group exercises and testimonials. The process of applying to and funding this degree will be elaborated. Frank RA. Practice management education--are residency programs properly preparing physicians for the 21st Century? College review - Denver, Colo. 1993 (Fall); 10(2):22-47. Gill JB, Schutt RC, Jr. Practice management education in orthopaedic surgical residencies. The Journal of bone and joint surgery 2007; Jan; 89(1):216-9. Parekh SG, Singh B. An MBA: the utility and effect on physicians' careers. The Journal of bone and joint surgery 2007 (Feb); 89(2):442-7.
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 | 0.006 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.029 | 0.007 |
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".