MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Meeting the needs of future physicians: a core curriculum initiative for postgraduate medical education at a Canadian university

2001· article· en· W2146658697 on OpenAlexafffundabout
K. Lynn Taylor, Albert E. Chudley

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Education · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInnovations in Medical Education
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersUniversity of ManitobaAssociation of American Medical Colleges
KeywordsCurriculumMedical educationAttendanceMedicineCurriculum developmentCore KnowledgeHealth careSession (web analytics)PsychologyPedagogyPolitical scienceComputer scienceKnowledge management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

UNLABELLED: In addition to possessing medical expertise, contemporary physicians are expected to be skilled communicators, critical consumers and users of medical research, teachers, collaborators, health care advocates, and managers. A core curriculum is a common set of learning experiences designed to help prepare physicians for these complex roles. PURPOSE: This article describes the design and implementation of one core curriculum, summarizes the feedback received from residents, and shares some of the lessons we are learning as we use feedback to develop our programme. METHOD: The core curriculum described was implemented at a Canadian university which offers 56 residency programmes with a total enrollment of approximately 360 students. The curriculum consisted of 30 sessions organized around four themes: biostatistics and epidemiology; communications and teaching skills; healthcare management, and ethical, medicolegal and lifestyle issues. Each session in the Core Curriculum was evaluated by residents with respect to the timing, quality, and value of the learning experience. In addition, residents participated in focus group discussions of their Core Curriculum experiences. RESULTS: Key findings related to the characteristics of effective core curriculum learning experiences and to the barriers to implementing a core curriculum across programmes. Of particular salience were findings related to explicit issues of attendance and the diverse needs of learners and programmes, and to more implicit issues of communication and managing change. The specific content and format of the Core Curriculum and the results of the evaluation process will be of interest to others considering a core curriculum for postgraduate medical programmes.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.382
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.295 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations21
Published2001
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical EducationSame topicInnovations in Medical EducationFrench-language works237,207