GP Surgeons’ Experiences of Training in British Columbia and Alberta: A Case Study of Enhanced Skills for Rural Primary Care Providers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: There has been a steady erosion of family physicians with enhanced surgical skills providing care for rural residents. This has been largely due to the lack of formal training avenues and continuing medical education (CME) opportunities afforded to those interested, and attrition of those currently practicing. METHODS: A qualitative study was undertaken using an exploratory policy framework to guide the collection of in-depth interview data on GP surgeons' training experiences. A purposive sample of GP surgeons currently practicing in rural BC and Alberta communities yielded interviews with 62 participants in person and an additional 8 by telephone. Interviews were audio recorded and transcribed then subjected to a process analysis. RESULTS: Participants thematically identified motivations for acquiring advanced skills training, resources required (primarily in the area of solid mentorship), the most efficacious context for a training program (structured), and differences in mentorship between obstetricians and general surgeons. CONCLUSION: Mentors and role models were the most salient influencing factor in the trajectory of training for the participants in this study. Mentorship between specialists and generalists was constrained at times by inter-professional tensions and was accomplished more successfully within a curriculum-based, structured environment as opposed to a learner-responsive training environment.
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 | 0.005 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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 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".