MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2421897051 · doi:10.1186/s12960-016-0135-6

Scoping review about the professional integration of internationally educated health professionals

2016· article· en· W2421897051 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueHuman Resources for Health · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGlobal Health Workforce Issues
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaUniversity of WaterlooUniversity of Alberta
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchHealth Canada
KeywordsCertificationProfessional developmentImmigrationHealth administrationAllied health professionsHealth services researchPublic relationsHealth careMedical educationPolitical scienceNursingMedicinePublic health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Over the last decade, Canada has been one of the top destination countries for internationally educated health professionals (IEHPs). After arrival, many struggle to professionally recertify and secure employment in their field. Considerable funding has been allocated to the development of new policies and programs to facilitate IEHPs' professional integration. Literature about the professional integration process and the available policies and programs is abundant, not synthesized and dispersed among a wide range of health professions and the academic and grey literature. This, in combination with the sustained policy relevance, contributed to the timeliness and necessity for conducting this scoping review. METHODS: We used an updated version of Arskey and O'Malley's six-stage scoping review framework to summarize the amount, types, sources and distribution of the literature. Findings were summarized numerically and thematically. The themes included pre-immigration activities and programs, early arrival activities and programs, professional recertification and workplace integration. RESULTS: Four hundred and seven published sources from 2000-2012 were retained for data charting and extraction. Most focused on international medical graduates or internationally educated nurses. IEHPs from the allied health professions were underrepresented. Methodologically, about one quarter of the papers are empirical studies with the next largest category being reports from professional certification bodies and educational institutions. The overarching concern is with workplace integration, professional recognition and bridging programs. Nursing dominates the literature about pre-immigration activities and programs whereas the literature about early arrival activities and programs, professional recertification and workplace integration is dominated by medicine. Although the literature does contain some information for IEHPs in the allied health professions, the thematic analysis did not identify a clear trend. A notable increase in the number of publications was present. CONCLUSIONS: The literature about IEHPs' professional integration in Canada is abundant. This reflects the sustained policy relevance of the recruitment, recognition and professional integration for IEHPs in Canada. This demonstrates that Canada provides an excellent case for this review from which the findings may have international significance. Nevertheless, little information is available about the effectiveness of the policies and programs available to facilitate IEHP integration, an area that requires further consideration.

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 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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.726
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.113
GPT teacher head0.543
Teacher spread0.430 · 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