Canadian DOs: International Expansion of Osteopathic Medical Education North of the Border
Bibliographic record
Abstract
CONTEXT: The growth of osteopathic medicine in the United States has led to a vibrant expansion of the profession internationally. Canadian students represent the majority of international applicants and matriculants to US colleges of osteopathic medicine (COMs); however, to our knowledge, no studies have explored this population. OBJECTIVE: To gain a better understanding of Canadian students attending US colleges of osteopathic medicine by examining their residency training preference, visa preference, intent to practice in the United States or Canada, receptiveness to incorporating osteopathic manipulative medicine into practice, specialty preference, estimated debt incurred, and effect of debt on specialty choice. METHODS: A 10-question electronic survey was sent to Canadian osteopathic medical students in the 17 COMs and branch campuses that accept international applicants. The initial survey pool consisted of frst-, second-, third-, and fourth-year medical students (classes of 2014-2017) compiled from a database managed by the Canadian Osteopathic Medical Student Association. RESULTS: Of the 102 students contacted, 66 (65%) completed the survey. Respondents had a strong desire to practice in Canada (44 [67%]) but were considering an Accreditation Council on Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) or dually accredited residency program in the United States (46 [70%] and 15 [23%], respectively) that would sponsor an H1B visa. Respondents were receptive to incorporating osteopathic manipulative medicine into practice (44 [67%]). Most respondents chose non-primary care specialties (40 [61%]) and incurred a debt of more than $200,000 (44 of 65 [68%]); however, debt had a limited infuence on respondents' choice of specialty (χ23=1.911; P=.591). CONCLUSION: Most respondents planned to complete ACGME training, to return to Canada to practice medicine, and to practice in a non-primary care specialty. As a growing population that will play a large role in the expansion and reception of the profession internationally, Canadian osteopathic medical students and US-trained Canadian DOs merit further examination.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.041 | 0.002 |
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".