MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2073039972 · doi:10.3138/jvme.33.1.45

Managing Client Communication for Effective Practice: What Skills Should Veterinary Graduates Have Acquired for Success?

2006· review· en· W2073039972 on OpenAlex

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.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Veterinary Medical Education · 2006
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicLeadership and Management in Organizations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedical educationCommunication skillsPractice managementMedicineVeterinary medicineFamily medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Twenty-one years ago, I continued a family tradition started by my grandfather and embarked on my chosen career as a veterinarian. I had been the recipient of a balanced education, with training in the core disciplines, and our mission was straightforward: Get out there and save lives. At the time of my graduation, anything I knew about communication I had learned from my mother. She declared herself a ‘‘good listener,’’ and I recall the many times I witnessed her sitting mutely while others droned on about themselves. If nothing else, I at least learned to keep my mouth shut while others spoke, even if I didn’t hear a word they said. Over time, I observed new communication styles (many from other veterinarians)—unconsciously adopting some while rejecting others. Except for the times when I struggled to explain to some of my Dutch dairy clients who spoke little English why their cows were developing sole ulcers, I hardly gave communication a second thought. Then, in 1991, I received a telephone call that would change my life. The chair of the complaints committee for the College of Veterinarians of Ontario (CVO—the provincial regulator) invited me to join the committee. In time, I assumed the position of chair myself and eventually joined the staff of the CVO as a committee advisor. In my 14 years of involvement with the CVO, I estimate that I have participated in the investigation of over 1,500 complaints made against veterinarians. The single factor common to virtually all of these complaints was difficulty, in all directions, with the effective communication that is required for the practice of veterinary medicine. Thus, I have come to understand the importance of communication in veterinary practice and the role poor communication plays in the genesis of such complaints. My comments below come from this perspective. That many veterinary schools now include courses on communication in their curricula is a testament to the importance of this learnable skill. Perhaps those remaining schools lamenting the dedication of scarce resources to instruction in communication skills will be persuaded by reading my story.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.934
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.004
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.123
GPT teacher head0.429
Teacher spread0.306 · 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