Surgical Resident Experience in Breast Disease: A National Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Management of breast disease is an integral component of general surgery. This study was performed to describe the exposure to breast disease by residents in Canadian general surgery programs. METHODS: This study involved a 20-item survey and pilot semistructured interviews. Surgical trainees at 12 training programs in Canada participated in the survey. Results were used to characterize resident experience with breast surgery and clinics. RESULTS: Residents across all post-graduate training years and from 12 Canadian medical schools responded (n = 162, 44 %). Residents had the most breast surgery experience in PGY2 and PGY3 years. One third of trainees performed ≤ 1 breast procedure per month. Only 25 % had attended more than one breast clinic per month. Lumpectomies were the most common procedure (20.7/year) and 94 % of residents performed sentinel lymph node biopsy. Four pilot semistructured interviews were performed. The greatest stated barriers to breast training were "lack of time" and the impression that these were "lower priority cases." CONCLUSIONS: Achieving competence in breast disease management is a key requirement for general surgery trainees. Surgical educators must ensure that the quality and quantity of residency training in breast diseases is sufficient for future surgeons to provide optimal patient care.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".