MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2069799913 · doi:10.1097/aog.0b013e318214e561

Recent Trends in Continuing Medical Education Among Obstetrician–Gynecologists

2011· article· en· W2069799913 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Richard M. Burwick, Jay Schulkin, Sarah Cooley, Vanitha Janakiraman, Errol R. Norwitz, Julian N. Robinson

Bibliographic record

VenueObstetrics and Gynecology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInnovations in Medical Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersU.S. Public Health Service
KeywordsCertificationContinuing medical educationMaintenance of CertificationMedicineFamily medicineBoard certificationCertificateContinuing educationAccreditationOdds ratioObstetrics and gynaecologyMedical educationPregnancyPolitical scienceInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To estimate current trends in continuing medical education among obstetrician-gynecologists in relation to the Maintenance of Certification program. METHODS: A validated questionnaire was mailed to 1,030 randomly selected physicians of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists in the United States, Puerto Rico, and Canada. Participants were asked about current practices and opinions regarding continuing medical education activities. Responses were compared between members mandated for Maintenance of Certification (board certification 1986 or later; time-limited certificate) or not (board certification before 1986; nontime-limited certificate). RESULTS: Five hundred twenty (50.4%) surveys were completed. Respondents were more often male (57.1%), generalists (87.3%), in community-based (73.8%) group practices (77.2%) with mean (±standard deviation) age 52.4±9.9 years. College physicians mandated to participate in the Maintenance of Certification program were more likely to rely on Annual Board Certification articles as a major source of continuing medical education credits compared with those not requiring Maintenance of Certification (79.9% compared with 44.6%, P<.001). This finding remained significant after multivariable adjustment for age, gender, years in practice, and practice type (odds ratio [OR] 9.09, 95% confidence interval [CI] 4.03-20.5). Conversely, Maintenance of Certification requirement led to decreased use of the national or international meetings (OR 0.31, 95% CI 0.14-0.67) and self-selected continuing medical education materials (OR 0.29, 95% CI 0.14-0.60) as sources of continuing medical education credits. Despite these differences, physicians in both groups equally valued the relevance of Annual Board Certification articles (92.6% compared with 96.4%, P=.23), the importance of content at academic meetings (98.3% compared with 99.3%, P=.33), the usefulness of simulation drills (97.8% compared with 94.3%, P=.35), and the general ability of continuing medical education activities to improve skills as a physician (90.9% compared with 86.4%, P=.20). CONCLUSION: Requirement of the Maintenance of Certification program has led to significant changes in continuing medical education choices by obstetrician-gynecologists. The changes in continuing medical education appear related to mandated obligations rather than personal preference.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.049

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.284 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueObstetrics and GynecologySame topicInnovations in Medical EducationFrench-language works237,207