Choosing family medicine. What influences medical students?
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
OBJECTIVE: To explore factors that influence senior medical students to pursue careers in family medicine. DESIGN: Qualitative study using semistructured interviews. SETTING: University of Western Ontario (UWO) in London. PARTICIPANTS: Eleven of 29 graduating UWO medical students matched to Canadian family medicine residency programs beginning in July 2001. METHOD: Eleven semistructured interviews were conducted with a maximum variation sample of medical students. Interviews were transcribed and reviewed independently, and a constant comparative approach was used by the team to analyze the data. MAIN FINDINGS: Family physician mentors were an important influence on participants' decisions to pursue careers in family medicine. Participants followed one of three pathways to selecting family medicine: from an early decision to pursue family medicine, from initial uncertainty about career choice, or from an early decision to specialize and a change of mind. CONCLUSION: The perception of a wide scope of practice attracts candidates to family medicine. Having more family medicine role models early in medical school might encourage more medical students to select careers in family medicine.
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 | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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