MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1666010023 · doi:10.1080/10401334.2015.1044656

Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Patient Care: Medical Students' Preparedness and Comfort

2015· article· en· W1666010023 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueTeaching and Learning in Medicine · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransgenderPreparednessLesbianCurriculumFocus groupMedicineHealth careFamily medicineQualitative researchHomosexualityPsychologyMedical educationNursingPedagogySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

UNLABELLED: Phenomenon: Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) individuals face significant barriers in accessing appropriate and comprehensive medical care. Medical students' level of preparedness and comfort caring for LGBT patients is unknown. APPROACH: An online questionnaire (2009-2010) was distributed to students (n = 9,522) at 176 allopathic and osteopathic medical schools in Canada and the United States, followed by focus groups (2010) with students (n = 35) at five medical schools. The objective of this study was to characterize LGBT-related medical curricula, to determine medical students' assessments of their institutions' LGBT-related curricular content, and to evaluate their comfort and preparedness in caring for LGBT patients. FINDINGS: Of 9,522 survey respondents, 4,262 from 170 schools were included in the final analysis. Most medical students (2,866/4,262; 67.3%) evaluated their LGBT-related curriculum as "fair" or worse. Students most often felt prepared addressing human immunodeficiency virus (HIV; 3,254/4,147; 78.5%) and non-HIV sexually transmitted infections (2,851/4,136; 68.9%). They felt least prepared discussing sex reassignment surgery (1,061/4,070; 26.1%) and gender transitioning (1,141/4,068; 28.0%). Medical education helped 62.6% (2,669/4,262) of students feel "more prepared" and 46.3% (1,972/4,262) of students feel "more comfortable" to care for LGBT patients. Four focus group sessions with 29 students were transcribed and analyzed. Qualitative analysis suggested students have significant concerns in addressing certain aspects of LGBT health, specifically with transgender patients. Insights: Medical students thought LGBT-specific curricula could be improved, consistent with the findings from a survey of deans of medical education. They felt comfortable, but not fully prepared, to care for LGBT patients. Increasing curricular coverage of LGBT-related topics is indicated with emphasis on exposing students to LGBT patients in clinical settings.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.159
Threshold uncertainty score0.987

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.100
GPT teacher head0.457
Teacher spread0.357 · 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