Preparing residents for family practice: role of an integrated “Triple C” curriculum
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There is limited understanding of the impact of Triple C competency-based curriculums on the preparation of residents for family practice. This paper describes a competency-based curriculum within an integrated longitudinal block design and presents preliminary evaluation data on the impact of this curriculum on preparedness for family practice. METHODS: First and second year family medicine residents were surveyed as a component of a year-end program evaluation to assess the extent to which the residency program is preparing them to engage in a variety of practice domains, the likelihood that they would engage in these domains, and the extent to which this residency program is comprehensive, relevant to their development as a family physician, and promotes interprofessional practice. RESULTS: Residents perceived themselves as prepared to engage in most practice areas and their intentions to engage in various practice domains were positively correlated to their ratings of preparedness. Ratings reflected that residents perceived this program as comprehensive and relevant to their development as a family physician and they perceived a high degree of encouragement for interprofessional practice. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides some preliminary evidence that an integrated competency-based curriculum, with an emphasis on interprofessional practice has the potential to effectively prepare residents for practice in family medicine.
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 | 0.001 | 0.030 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".