Interest in Geriatric Medicine in Canada: How Can We Secure a Next Generation of Geriatricians?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Canada, there is minimal training of geriatrics for physicians, a shortage of geriatricians, and extremely low numbers of students entering geriatrics. This study explored student interest in and barriers and enticements to geriatric medicine as a career choice. Medical students attending a university in Ontario, Canada, were surveyed in their first year (N=121), after a geriatric education session, and again in their second year (N=118) about their interest in a career in geriatrics. In the first year, less than 20% of students were interested in geriatrics; in the second year this decreased to 16%. In both years, female students were more interested than male students. Those students interested in geriatrics had higher hopes that their practice would involve primarily adults and seniors. Students not interested in geriatrics rated performing procedures and technical skills, not wanting to work with chronically ill patients, and caring for younger patients as important practice characteristics. Although the importance of prestige was low for all students, it was significantly higher for those not interested in geriatrics. Although changes to prestige, income, lifestyle, and length of residency training were identified as potential enticements to geriatrics, they were not major deterrents to a career in geriatrics. The findings suggest strategies that may affect student interest in geriatrics, such as increased and early student exposure to geriatrics with emphasis on fostering and nurturing student interest, consideration of various enticements to this specialty, and the development of health system-specific solutions to this problem. Knowledge of student and practice characteristics that increase the likelihood of selecting geriatrics as a specialty may allow for early identification and support of future geriatricians.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".