Report on Ambulatory Teaching : A Japanese Look at the Canadian Educational System
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND Japanese medical education has undergone dramatic changes over the last 5 years. Clinical exercises and ambulatory-care training are now stressed to prepare medical students and residents for work in primary and continuing-care settings. For comparative purposes, we conducted a review of the undergraduate and residency training programs for ambulatory care at the University of Toronto in Canada. This report will examine the problems of training programs for ambulatory care in Japan by comparing the Canadian and Japanese models. METHOD From December 2004 to March 2005, the first author observed the ambulatory training systems at the University of Toronto. OUTLINE OF CANADIAN AMBULATORY TRAINING PROGRAMS : There are three typical types of ambulatory training programs in Canada : community-office based programs for undergraduate students in family and community medicine; hospital/clinic based programs for junior residents in internal medicine; and consultation service programs for senior residents in internal medicine. Undergraduate and residency training programs are largely consistent with each other. The current trend in medical education is towards increased consolidation and efficiency in teacher and student training systems, with a reduction in the number of teaching hospitals and integration of teaching staff and curricula. Moreover, team-based training for ambulatory care appears effective. DISCUSSION To improve the Japanese ambulatory training system, it is desirable to increase communication and contact between undergraduate-program educators and residency-training program educators in order to achieve integration and consistency between programs.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".