MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1503906637 · doi:10.25011/cim.v30i4.2826

65. Concurrent pursuit of degrees and courses during community medicine residency: Challenges, policies and proceduress

2007· article· en· W1503906637 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Matthew Russell, Ardene Robinson Vollman, T. Strudsholm

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical and investigative medicine · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRadiology practices and education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSalarySpecialtyMedical educationPracticumWork (physics)MedicineFamily medicinePsychologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We describe the policies and practices of Canadian Community Medicine (CM) residency programs regarding the Royal College requirement for one year of academic course work. We surveyed 10 Program Directors (PD) of the 11 Canadian CM residency programs (excluding our university) by either telephone interview or written completion of a structured interview guide. Questions addressed: what is currently allowed and/or encouraged; the policies in place; and the benefits and challenges to concurrent pursuit of degrees by CM residents. Of particular interest were policies regarding residents studying off-site and what actions PDs take if courses or degrees desired by a resident were not available at the home university. Seven of 10 PDs replied. Most programs did not have written policies to deal with requests to study off-site; decisions were made on a case-by-case basis. When approved, residents received salary support and bore all costs of off-site education. Several CM programs require degree acquisition during the academic year; others encourage degree acquisition. While CM program websites indicate degree completion is possible within one calendar year, often practicum placements run concurrently with resident clinical rotations or projects are competed during residency rotations. Most programs prefer residents to stay on campus for their contribution to rounds and on-call, socialization of the cohort, and continuity. It would be helpful to programs generally if PDs had policies to guide decisions; it would be particularly useful for the specialty if this were (to the degree possible) a common policy across universities. PDs and universities wish to make academic learning more readily accessible. We suggest a focus on the development of quality distance learning and innovative strategies to share course development and improve residents’ access to learning without the need to go off-site. Zweifler J, Evans R. Development of a residency/MPH Program. Fam Med 2001; 33(6):453-8. Tilak GS, Baker SR. Self-subsidization of educational expenses by senior radiology residents. Acad Radiol 2007; 14:105-9. Walter DA, Rosenquist PB, Bawtinhimer G. Distance learning technologies in the training of psychiatry residents; a critical assessment. Acad Psychiatry 2004; 28(10):60-5.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.663
Threshold uncertainty score0.678

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0100.005
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.419
GPT teacher head0.459
Teacher spread0.040 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical and investigative medicineSame topicRadiology practices and educationFrench-language works237,207