MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Melding the Family Medicine and General Internal Medicine Rotations into an Ambulatory Clerkship

2001· article· en· W1974713468 on OpenAlexaff
KIMBERLY A. CROOKS, Richard P. Usatine, Thomas J. Mattimore

Bibliographic record

VenueAcademic Medicine · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInnovations in Medical Education
Canadian institutionsKimberly-Clark (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCurriculumMedicineMedical educationAmbulatoryAmbulatory careClinical clerkshipFamily medicinePsychologyInternal medicineHealth carePedagogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: A significant overlap exists between the work done by general internists and that done by family physicians in the ambulatory care setting. Consequently, the curriculum committee at the University of California, Los Angeles, UCLA School of Medicine decided to join the two clinical experiences in order to promote interdisciplinary teaching and learning. UCLA has developed and implemented a curriculum for combining the family medicine clerkship and the outpatient portion of the internal medicine clerkship. The new format streamlines teaching obligations in ambulatory sites while standardizing the curriculum with weekly, shared didactic instruction on campus. Description: UCLA is in the midst of a significant curricular revision for the clinical years. All third-year clerkships have been modified to incorporate a greater proportion of case-based instruction and to concentrate on particular aspects of the physical examination in 2000–01. The ambulatory education merge began with a needs assessment that identified topics taught by the respective curricula to eliminate duplication and ascertain areas not addressed. The outcome is a combined ambulatory didactic curriculum, offered as a continuum for one eight-week clerkship. Teaching responsibilities for the new shared sessions were assigned based on departmental strengths and constructed to emphasize the clinical needs of the ambulatory setting, particularly the ability to function in this time-constrained atmosphere. New case-based instruction was developed in geriatrics, cardiology, and musculoskeletal exam skills (using patients with rheumatologic diseases), and for diabetes and hypertension. These additions supplemented existing instruction modules that students had enjoyed in dermatology (using Web-based cases), prevention, contraception, nutrition, and complementary medicine. The majority of instruction has shifted to small-group format; faculty lacking experience in this teaching approach have received individual faculty development. The students begin with a single orientation for the eight-week clerkship, with an introduction to the focused workup in the outpatient setting. The faculty give individual feedback while observing the students' skills with standardized patients. Overviews of family medicine and general internal medicine as disciplines are presented, and logistic information is given. The clinical portions of both clerkships remain intact, as the students spend four weeks at either the family medicine or the internal medicine site, followed by four weeks at the opposite site. Returning to UCLA each Friday for these shared sessions, the students participate in group activities, lectures, demonstrations, patient interviews and examinations, and a review of informatics and the use of the computer for presentations. Every student is required to complete a case write-up or do a PowerPoint presentation before his or her peers, based on a patient seen during the rotation. A single combined exam with questions covering basic principles in each discipline closes the rotation. A grade for each specialty is generated based upon the student's clinical performance, the final paper or presentation, and the portion of the exam devoted to that specialty Discussion: This format allows the clinical experiences in each discipline to remain distinct, thus permitting each specialty to retain its own identity. The ambulatory clerkship is viewed as a work in progress during this inaugural year as our course-evaluation process continues to prompt modifications. The students consistently rate sessions with handson learning activities and small-group sessions highly. The next goal is to develop an on-line 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 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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.084

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.008
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0250.008

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 head0.084
GPT teacher head0.421
Teacher spread0.338 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAcademic Medicine→Same topicInnovations in Medical Education→French-language works237,207→