MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2002380673 · doi:10.1080/10401334.2014.914943

Expectations of Clinical Teachers and Faculty Regarding Development of the CanMEDS-Family Medicine Competencies: Laval Developmental Benchmarks Scale for Family Medicine Residency Training

2014· article· en· W2002380673 on OpenAlex
Miriam Lacasse, Johanne Théorêt, Sylvie Tessier, Louise Arsenault

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueTeaching and Learning in Medicine · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInnovations in Medical Education
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedical educationScale (ratio)Residency trainingDelphi methodCurriculumPsychologyMedicineFaculty developmentFamily medicineProfessional developmentPedagogyContinuing educationComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The CanMEDS-Family Medicine (CanMEDS-FM) framework defines the expected terminal enabling competencies (EC) for family medicine (FM) residency training in Canada. However, benchmarks throughout the 2-year program are not yet defined. PURPOSES: This study aimed to identify expected time frames for achievement of the CanMEDS-FM competencies during FM residency training and create a developmental benchmarks scale for family medicine residency training. METHODS: This 2011-2012 study followed a Delphi methodology. Selected faculty and clinical teachers identified, via questionnaire, the expected time of EC achievement from beginning of residency to one year in practice (0, 6, 12, […] 36 months). The 15-85th percentile intervals became the expected competency achievement interval. Content validity of the obtained benchmarks was assessed through a second Delphi round. RESULTS: The 1st and 2nd rounds were completed by 33 and 27 respondents, respectively. A developmental benchmarks scale was designed after the 1st round to illustrate expectations regarding achievement of each EC. The 2nd round (content validation) led to minor adjustments (1.9±2.7 months) of intervals for 44 of the 92 competencies, the others remaining unchanged. CONCLUSIONS: The Laval Developmental Benchmarks Scale for Family Medicine clarifies expectations regarding achievement of competencies throughout FM training. In a competency-based education system this now allows identification and management of outlying residents, both those excelling and needing remediation. Further research should focus on assessment of the scale reliability after pilot implementation in family medicine clinical teaching units at Laval University, and corroborate the established timeline in other sites.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.029
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.359
Threshold uncertainty score0.980

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.029
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.097
GPT teacher head0.404
Teacher spread0.307 · 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