Family medicine residency training and burnout: a qualitative study
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Almost three-quarters of family practice residents in British Columbia (BC) meet criteria for burnout. We sought to understand how burnout is perceived and experienced by family medicine residents, and to identify both contributory and protective factors for resident burnout. METHOD: Two semi-structured focus groups were conducted with ten family practice residents from five distinct University of British Columbia training sites. Participants completed the Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI). The data were analyzed using a thematic analysis approach. RESULTS: Seventy percent of the focus group participants met criteria for burnout using the MBI. The experience of burnout was described as physical and emotional exhaustion, loss of motivation, isolation from loved ones, and disillusionment with the medical profession. Contributory factors included high workload, burned-out colleagues, perceived undervaluing of family medicine, lack of autonomy, and inability to achieve work-life balance. Protective factors included strong role models in medicine, feeling that one's work is valued and rotations in family medicine. CONCLUSIONS: The high level of burnout in family medicine residents in BC is a multifactorial and complex phenomenon. Training programs and faculty should be aware of burnout risk factors and strive to implement changes to reduce burnout, including allowing residents increased control over scheduling, access to counseling services and training for resident mentors.
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 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 | 0.008 | 0.036 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 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 it