MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

How well do paediatric residency programmes prepare residents for clinical practice and their future careers?

2006· article· en· W2166514736 on OpenAlexaffabout
Lani Lieberman, Robert Hilliard

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Education · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDiversity and Career in Medicine
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedical educationMedicineFamily medicineMEDLINEPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

CONTEXT: Educators across Canada are presently discussing whether the current 4-year residency programmes adequately prepare paediatricians for their future careers. Studies carried out in the USA have repeatedly shown areas of weakness in residency training, but there are no studies looking at the overall adequacy of training across Canada. OBJECTIVES: To assess practising paediatricians' perceptions of the adequacy of their residency training as preparation for clinical practice and to assess practising paediatricians' opinions about the required mandatory length of training. METHODS: A questionnaire based on previous studies was sent to 434 paediatricians certified between 1999 and 2003, asking for their opinions of their preparedness for practice in the broad areas of paediatrics and in the professional roles of the doctor-specialist. RESULTS: Overall, 239 (55%) paediatricians replied, 96% of whom indicated they were 'adequately' or 'very well' trained. Areas in which opinions on training were positive included emergency medicine, neonatology, endocrinology, haematology/oncology, neurology, infectious diseases and respirology. Areas where preparation was considered to have been less adequate included gynaecology, child psychiatry, behavioural psychology, surgical specialties, orthopaedics and adolescents. With respect to the roles of the doctor-specialist, strengths of training included the areas of medical expert, collaborator, ethics and professionalism, and communicator. Respondents felt they were less adequately prepared for the role of a medical expert dealing with palliative care, for dealing with bereaved parents and as manager of an office practice. Despite these weaknesses, 80% felt that 4 years of training was sufficient. DISCUSSION: The results of the study are comparable with those of previous studies carried out in the USA and reinforce the need for regular programme assessment. This study will hopefully lead to the improvement of current paediatric residency programmes and enhanced education and training of future paediatricians. Although overall satisfaction with training was high, paediatric programmes need to make some changes by providing more appropriate training with less tertiary care, hospital-based training and more community and ambulatory-based experiences.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.706
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.370
Teacher spread0.351 · 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

Citations69
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical EducationSame topicDiversity and Career in MedicineFrench-language works237,207