Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACTClinician investigators play a critical role in developing new approaches and improving upon existing approaches to medical care, ultimately resulting in improved health of Canadians. Such individuals are uniquely suited to conduct research that addresses clinical observations as well as translates research findings into novel approaches to disease management and prevention. The need for such individuals has long been recognized and in 1995, the Royal College of Physician and Surgeons of Canada (RCPSC) developed the first formal training program in the country to help support the development of clinician investigators. Since its inception, over 200 trainees have completed the RCPSC Clinician Investigator Program (CIP), the details of which are communicated in a review by Cathy Hayward et al. [1] in Clinical and Investigative Medicine. Currently, the CIP is active at 15 (almost all) medical schools across the country. Dr. Andrew Badley, a clinician scientist in the Division of Infectious Disease, led the development of the application for the CIP at the University of Ottawa (U of O), which was ultimately approved in 2002. In 2003 Jonathan Angel became the Director of the CIP at U of O and in 2004, the first trainee was accepted into the program. Since then, approximately 40 trainees have enrolled in the CIP, and as of April 2014, 25 trainees have completed the program. While a few of the recent trainees have resumed clinical training following their research activities, the majority of the graduates (n=14) have gone on to assume academic positions at the University of Ottawa and elsewhere.RÉSUMÉ Les cliniciens-chercheurs jouent un rôle clé dans le développement de nouvelles méthodes et dans l’amélioration des méthodes existantes dans les soins médicaux. Le but est, ultimement, d’améliorer la santé des Canadiens et Canadiennes. Ces personnes sont bien placées pour mener des projets de recherche qui portent sur des observations cliniques et qui traduisent les résultats de recherche en approches novatrices pour la prévention et la prise en charge des maladies. Le besoin pour ces professionnels est reconnu depuis longtemps. En 1995, le Collège royal des médecins et chirurgiens du Canada (CRMCC) a créé le premier programme officiel pour appuyer le perfectionnement des cliniciens-chercheurs. Depuis sa création, plus de 200 personnes ont complété le Programme de cliniciens-chercheurs (PCC) du CRMCC. Une revue du programme a été publiée par Cathy Hayward et coll., dans la revue Clinical and Investigative Medicine. Actuellement, le PCC est offert dans 15 facultés de médecine au Canada, soit presque la totalité d’entre elles. Dr Andrew Badley, un clinicien-scientifique de la Division des maladies infectieuses, a mené l’intégration du PCC à l’Université d’Ottawa, programme qui a été approuvé ultimement en 2002. En 2003, Jonathan Angel est devenu le directeur du PCC de l’Université d’Ottawa et, en 2004, le premier stagiaire du programme était admis. Depuis cette date, environ 40 stagiaires se sont inscrits au PCC et, en avril 2014, 25 d’entre eux avaient terminé le programme. Bien que quelques-uns des plus récents stagiaires aient repris leur formation clinique après avoir achevé leur recherche, la majorité des finissants (n=14) ont accepté des fonctions universitaires à l’Université d’Ottawa ou ailleurs.
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 | 0.010 | 0.028 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.185 | 0.050 |
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".