395 INCREASING RESIDENT RESEARCH PRODUCTIVITY WITH THE AID OF A SCHOLARLY ACTIVITY COORDINATOR.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Research is encouraged as part of residency in Royal College training programs. However, resident productivity in this area is highly variable. We report our experience of supporting scholarly activities of residents by the provision of a scholarly activity coordinator (SAC). The SAC role includes identifying and promoting resident involvement in research and supporting residents in preparing research results for scholarly presentation. The SAC is involved in facilitating literature searches, developing research questions, designing ethical protocol forms, assisting with statistical analyses, and maintaining necessary timelines to ensure that projects are conducted efficiently. Within a first-year rotation, the department also provided the residents with protective time, with the SAC and faculty, in order to explore research opportunities and to develop basic expertise. In addition, residents were encouraged and granted the opportunity to take research elective time each year throughout their residency training (to a maximum of 6 months). Our research question addressed the impact of the SAC on research endeavor by our residents. Method We retroactively reviewed data from the Royal College program review documents of January 2001 (prior to SAC being in place) and of October 2004 (following 30 months with a SAC) in regards to the following criteria: peer-reviewed publications, published abstracts for presentation at meetings, grants submitted, and grants funded. Results From 2001 to 2004, the number of published abstracts increased from 35 to 106, the number of grants submitted increased from 8 to 14, and the number of grants funded increased from 4 to 10. The number of peer-reviewed publications remained essentially stable with 54 in 2001 and 42 in 2004. Discussion We are the first residency program to publish the impact of a SAC on resident research activities. Our data indicate that the employment of a SAC results in increased productivity and a better success rate in obtaining research funding. Residents identify a greater sense of comfort and ability in participating in research and in the presentation of results at scientific meetings. We anticipate the increase in the number of published abstracts will lead to an increase in the number of paper submissions to peer-reviewed publications. Income from foreign residents training in Canadian residency programs could potentially generate funding for a SAC position. In terms of the University of British Columbia Pediatrics program, the SAC position has become a key component in the promotion of resident research. We recommend that the expertise of a SAC be available in all residency programs.
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 | 0.050 | 0.134 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.046 | 0.020 |
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".