A qualitative study of the international medical graduate and the orientation process.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: International medical graduates (IMGs) play an important role in physician resource planning in many countries and are heavily relied on to fill vacancies in underserved communities. New IMGs may experience difficulty with understanding how medicine is organized in new countries. Effective orientation processes can assist new IMGs in making successful transitions to medical practice in their new countries, reducing professional isolation and enhancing the integration of IMGs and their families within their new communities. The purpose of this qualitative study was to explore perceptions of, and experiences with, orientation processes for new IMGs. METHODS: A stratified sample of IMGs and senior administrators of medical services from each of the regional health authorities in Newfoundland and Labrador was invited to participate in semistructured telephone interviews. RESULTS: Thirteen general practitioners/family physicians, 6 specialists and 4 administrators were interviewed. New IMGs need to learn about the health care system and the peculiarities of the specific practice context in which they will be working. Orientation needs to include opportunities for reflecting on one's own cultural biases and for learning about the cultural background and beliefs of a new patient population. Mentoring and effective integration within the community also emerged as important components of effective orientation processes. DISCUSSION: Our findings suggest that orientation processes for new IMGs must be attentive to both professional and personal needs, comprehensive, multifaceted and sustained. Orientation that is responsive to the various needs of new IMGs and their families may contribute to enhanced retention. CONCLUSION: Effective orientation processes are an important means of reducing professional isolation and supporting new IMGs in the transition to medical practice in their new communities.
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 | 0.016 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".