MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2466140256 · doi:10.1515/ijamh-2016-5012

Training international medical graduate clinical fellows: the challenges and opportunities for adolescent medicine programs

2015· article· en· W2466140256 on OpenAlexaffabout
Eudice Goldberg

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Adolescent Medicine and Health · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGlobal Health Workforce Issues
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSubspecialtyAccreditationIMGMedical educationGraduate medical educationGlobeTraining (meteorology)Medical schoolMedicinePolitical sciencePsychologyFamily medicineComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Adolescent medicine achieved accreditation status first in the United States in 1994 and then in Canada in 2008 and even if it is not an accredited subspecialty in most other Western nations, it has still become firmly established as a distinct discipline. This has not necessarily been the case in some developing countries, where even the recognition of adolescence as a unique stage of human development is not always acknowledged. The program at SickKids in Toronto has prided itself in treating its international medical graduates (IMG) clinical fellows the same as their Canadian subspecialty residents by integrating them seamlessly into the training program. Although this approach has been laudable to a great extent, it may have fallen short in formally acknowledging and addressing the challenges that the IMG trainees have had to overcome. Moving forward, faculty must be trained and supports instituted that are geared specifically towards these challenges. This must be done on a formal basis to ensure both the success of the trainees as well as the overall enrichment of the fellowship training 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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.035
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.044
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.183

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0350.044
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0100.005
Scholarly communication0.0110.010
Open science0.0030.018
Research integrity0.0090.014
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0240.004

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 head0.758
GPT teacher head0.590
Teacher spread0.168 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations2
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Adolescent Medicine and HealthSame topicGlobal Health Workforce IssuesFrench-language works237,207