Family physicians' attitudes toward education in research skills during residency: findings from a national mailed survey.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the attitudes of practising Canadian family physicians toward education in research skills during residency, to identify what determines these attitudes, and to investigate the effect of education in research skills on future research activity. DESIGN: Mailed survey. SETTING: Primary care. PARTICIPANTS: Stratified random sample of 247 practising physicians who were members of the College of Family Physicians of Canada. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Physicians' attitudes toward education in research skills during residency, their perceptions of the value of research in primary care, and their current involvement in research activities. RESULTS: Overall response rate was 56%. Nearly all respondents agreed that critical appraisal skills are essential to the practice of modern family medicine. Most agreed that it is very important that the evidence base for primary care medicine be developed by family physicians, yet only one-third agreed that research skills ought to receive more emphasis during residency training, and fewer than one-quarter agreed that practising family physicians should have strong research skills. Fewer than half the respondents agreed that a core goal of family medicine residency training should be to promote and develop an active interest in research. While three-quarters agreed that research projects during residency can be formative learning experiences, only about 40% indicated that research projects should be required, and only about 20% considered their own resident research projects to have been highly influential learning experiences. Respondents whose residency programs had research in the curriculum were significantly more likely to have found their research projects to be highly influential learning experiences (P <.05), and those who had successfully completed research projects were less likely to believe that they lacked the necessary skills and expertise to conduct their own research studies. Those who had successfully completed resident research projects participated in postresidency research activity at a significantly higher rate than those who did not complete projects (P <.01). CONCLUSION: Despite a conviction that research is important in primary care, only a few practising family physicians in our sample believed that strong research skills are important or that education in research skills should receive more emphasis during residency training. Resident research projects are not invariably influential learning experiences, although some evidence indicates that successful completion of a project makes future participation in research more likely.
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 | 0.005 | 0.064 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".