Medical students' self-reported preparedness and attitudes in providing care to ethnic minorities.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To assess medical students' self-reported preparedness to provide care to ethnic minorities, factors that influence preparedness, and attitudes toward cultural competency training. METHODS: A cross-sectional study, which invited University of British Columbia medical students to participate in a survey on student demographics, knowledge and awareness, preparedness and willingness, and personal attitudes. Of 1024, eligible, 301 students consented to study. RESULTS: Students across all year levels felt significantly less ready to provide care for non-English speaking Chinese patients compared to "any" patients. Proficiency in working with interpreters was correlated with readiness, OR 4.447 (1.606-12.315) along with 3rd and 4th year level in medical school, OR 3.550 (1.378-9.141) and 4.424 (1.577-12.415), respectively. Over 80% of respondents reported interest in learning more about the barriers and possible ways of overcoming them. CONCLUSIONS: More opportunities for cultural competency training in the medical curriculum are warranted and would be welcomed by the students.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".