Does a third year of emergency medicine training make a difference? Historical cohort study of Queen's University graduates.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To describe outcomes of a third-year residency (PGY-3) program in family medicine/emergency medicine in terms of its graduates' practice characteristics and their self-assessed preparedness for practising emergency medicine. DESIGN: A questionnaire was sent to graduates of Queen's University's family medicine residency programs. SETTING: Recent graduates' practices. PARTICIPANTS: All 30 graduates of Queen's University's Family Medicine/Emergency Medicine Program (PGY-3s) from 1988 to 1997 and 90 matched controls chosen randomly from among the 250 graduates of the 2-year family medicine residency program (PGY-2s) during the same period. Six of the 120 were excluded. Response rate was 89%. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Current practice of family and emergency medicine, leadership activities in emergency medicine, self-assessment of preparedness to practise and to lead others at the end of training, self-report of frequency of emergency care situations in subsequent practice for which physicians felt unprepared by their training, and catchment population and "rurality" of location of current practice. RESULTS: Compared with controls, more PGY-3s practiced and took leadership roles in emergency medicine in their hospitals and communities. At the end of their training, PGY-3s reported higher levels of preparedness for practicing and providing leadership in emergency medicine. Both groups reported the same frequency of encountering emergency situations in subsequent practice for which they felt inadequately prepared. Both groups practised in communities of similar size and location. CONCLUSION: Graduates of Queen's University's third-year emergency medicine program appear to practise in accordance with their extra training.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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".