Pediatric Resident Training in the Diagnosis and Treatment of Acute Otitis Media
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the presence and characteristics of formalized curricula for pediatric resident education for the diagnosis and treatment of acute otitis media. DESIGN: A survey was mailed to the program directors of all 224 accredited US and Canadian pediatric residency programs. Questions focused on the development, components, and teaching of any otitis media curriculum. Program directors were also questioned about their approach towards evaluating resident competency of otitis media and their future plans for otitis media-related training. RESULTS: A total of 144 program directors (64%) responded to the survey. Among respondents, 59% had some form of formalized education related to the diagnosis or treatment of otitis media. These curricula primarily consisted of lectures by general pediatricians <3 times per year. CONCLUSIONS: Although otitis media is the most common disease seen by practicing general pediatricians, the Residency Review Committee in Pediatrics does not mandate formal otitis media-related training. Aside from informal case-by-case education, this survey demonstrated that only slightly more than half of all pediatric residency programs have some formalized resident education of this common pediatric problem, and most of those curricula are infrequent lectures.
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 | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".