MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1953646767 · doi:10.36834/cmej.36612

So you married a doctor? Preparing trainees for medical marriages

2013· article· en· W1953646767 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Monica L. Lypson, Rachel Perlman, Paula T. Ross

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Medical Education Journal · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDiversity and Career in Medicine
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGraduation (instrument)Merge (version control)Medical educationMedical schoolPopulationFamily medicinePsychologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Most medical marriages occur before graduation from medical school; however, many medical students are unaware of the unique challenges associated with careers in medicine (e.g., financial insecurity, fatigue, stress, academic trouble, etc.) as they prepare to merge their careers with marriage or other long term relationships.1 Physician relationships in both the United States and Canada typically mirror national relationship trends in the larger population with a few exceptions.2–4 For example, physicians entering marriage tend to be older and divorce rates may be gender specific; the divorce rate for female physicians is higher than male physicians, the marriage rate is higher for female physicians than non-physician females, and approximately half of female physicians marry other physicians.5 Recently, both the Liaison Committee on Medical School and the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada included requirements toward helping trainees better manage their health and wellness. In the United States the focus is on medical student wellness and programs to promote the well-being of medical students and facilitate their adjustment to the physical and emotional demands of medical education.6 The CanMEDS 2005 Framework, under the competency of “professional”, requires a commitment to physician health.7 Trainees remain curious about how medical marriages function in real life, including the challenges of balancing the demands of work, personal relationships and children; however they are typically provided with little insight to help guide them. Given that medical school is the time when many students are beginning marriages or other long term partnerships, we developed a workshop for medical students to explore these issues using an encouraging approach to highlight the positive aspects of relationships to promote trainee wellness through a focus on work-family balance in physician domestic partnerships. The workshop explored existing literature in this area along with first-hand accounts from physician couples. We targeted topics such as managing the “Super Couple Syndrome”, the “Good Enough Mother” and identifying potential relationship threats. We also addressed protective actions such as managing stress, remaining engaged in the relationship, paying attention to parenting, and implementing communication methods that enhance friendship and intimacy. 8 Individuals from single- and dual-physician marriages as well as same-sex partnerships were invited to discuss their relationship experiences and the implications of medical marriages. They also discussed potential barriers and challenges to managing their own personal and professional lives. Invitees also answered questions addressing medical students’ concerns about the challenges and struggles that come from maintaining a relationship when starting a career in medicine, such as career decisions and the role of physicians in intimate relationships. Our evaluations revealed that the trainees found the workshop useful in getting candid advice from real people who have experienced dual career domestic partnerships and also helped them recognize the importance of giving considerations to future work-family balance and potentially lifestyles that may be unique to certain specialties. Both faculty and trainees affirmed that it was critical to provide doctors-in-training with exposure to issues of work-family balance as they prepare for their future careers in medicine. Faculty participants also stated the workshop gave them the opportunity to reflect on their career path and appropriate work-life balance, and provided the opportunity to listen to their spouses’ perceptions and attitudes about their career and relationship. Ultimately, the exposure to evidence-based information on work-life balance and the candid advice from real people who have “gone the course” helped trainees better recognize this area of physician wellness.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.099

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0050.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0300.005

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.296 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations1
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Medical Education JournalSame topicDiversity and Career in MedicineFrench-language works237,207