Undergraduate Otolaryngology Education in Canadian Medical Schools
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To examine the quantity and nature of undergraduate otolaryngology instruction in the Canadian medical school system and to present the management of the undergraduate otolaryngology curriculum at the University of Toronto medical school with a yearly enrolment of 224 students. STUDY DESIGN: Survey questionnaire and narrative description. METHODS: A structured one-page survey was administered to the education directors of all 16 Canadian medical schools. The administration of core learning material, scheduling, patient encounter logging, and student and instructor evaluations with computerized, on-line systems at the University of Toronto was described. RESULTS: Rotations in otolaryngology were highly variable across medical schools. Mandatory rotations in otolaryngology were identified in only 6 of the 16 undergraduate curricula. The average length of clinical experience in schools with mandatory rotations was 4.6 days. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of Canadian medical graduates complete their undergraduate training with minimal clinical experience in otolaryngology. There is a clear discrepancy between the quantity and perceived need for training. To provide a thorough and equitable exposure to otolaryngology, a curriculum with standardized lectures and evaluation procedures is required.
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 | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 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".