The Establishment of Core Competencies for Canadian Genetic Counsellors: Validation of Practice Based Competencies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Numerous groups of health professionals have undertaken the task of defining core competencies for their profession. The goal of establishing core competencies is to have a defined standard for such professional needs as practice guidelines, training curricula, certification, continuing competency and re-entry to practice. In 2006, the Canadian Association of Genetic Counsellors (CAGC) recognized the need for uniform practice standards for the profession in Canada, given the rapid progress of genetic knowledge and technologies, the expanding practice of genetic counsellors and the increasing demand for services. We report here the process by which the CAGC Practice Based Competencies were developed and then validated via two survey cycles, the first within the CAGC membership, and the second with feedback from external stakeholders. These competencies were formally approved in 2012 and describe the integrated skills, attitudes and judgment that genetic counsellors in Canada require in order to perform the services and duties that fall within the practice of the profession responsibly, safely, effectively and ethically.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".