Updated Survey of the Geriatric Content of Canadian Undergraduate and Postgraduate Medical Curricula
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: A survey in 2005 determined the hours of mandatory geriatrics content in Canadian undergraduate and postgraduate medical curricula. The present survey was undertaken to update these data for 2008-9. METHODS: A survey was sent to a designated geriatrician at each medical school. RESULTS: The mandatory geriatrics content of the undergraduate curricula ranged between 10 and 299 hours, with a mean of 82. Seven of 16 schools had a mandatory clerkship rotation of a least 1 week. Fourteen family medicine programs had a rotation in geriatric medicine and all psychiatry programs required a rotation in geriatric psychiatry. A geriatric rotation was mandatory for six internal medicine, six neurology, five physiatry, one orthopedic, and one emergency medicine program. In comparison to 2004-5, the mean hours of geriatrics teaching in the undergraduate curricula had increased from 78 to 82. However, two schools saw a decrease in preclerkship teaching and one school lost a 2-week clerkship. Postgraduate requirements had changed little overall, with the exception that, for emergency medicine, geriatrics was now mandatory for only one program, instead of three. CONCLUSIONS: Although the total number of hours of teaching in geriatric medicine in the undergraduate curricula had increased slightly in 2008-9 compared to 2004-5, in some schools teaching hours were reduced. In the postgraduate curricula emergency medicine requirements for geriatrics were reduced. Of greater importance is determining which core competencies are being taught and mastered, and this is an area of ongoing study.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".