MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2138476658 · doi:10.4103/1357-6283.101455

Inspiring Health Advocacy in Family Medicine: A Qualitative Study

2011· article· en· W2138476658 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueEducation for Health · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicChild and Adolescent Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCurriculumHealth careQualitative researchMedical educationNursingMedicineExperiential learningPsychologyPublic relationsPolitical scienceSociologyPedagogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

CONTEXT: The Canadian Medical Education Directions for Specialists identifies health advocacy as an essential role for physicians. Health advocacy is also an integral part of the principles of family medicine. It relates to the physician's responsibility to identify and respond appropriately to the social determinants of health and the healthcare needs of vulnerable and marginalized populations. The competencies related to health advocacy are regarded by medical educators as difficult to integrate into residency training. OBJECTIVES: This qualitative study investigates what family medicine residents, educators and physicians perceive inspires them to engage in health advocacy, and explores how best to incorporate related competencies into medical training. METHODS: In-depth, semi-structured interviews conducted with a purposive sample of four family medicine residents, three physicians and two educators who self-identified or were identified by peers as health advocates. Interviews were recorded, transcribed and analyzed using framework analysis. Transcripts were made available to the participants to ensure transcript accuracy. FINDINGS: Early exposure to social injustice, parental influences, role modeling and internal motivators were seen as important inspirations for health advocacy. CONCLUSION: Creating an enabling and nurturing environment prior to and during residency training may be necessary to sustain the motivation to engage in health advocacy. Findings from this study suggest possibilities for a resident-guided participatory curriculum development process around health advocacy. Recommendations for promoting health advocacy in postgraduate training include effective integration of health advocacy in the curriculum by providing protected time and resources, providing experiential learning opportunities and fostering a community of practice for physician health advocates.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.287
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.277
GPT teacher head0.584
Teacher spread0.308 · 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