MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2471043967

Medical students' self-reported preparedness and attitudes in providing care to ethnic minorities.

2014· article· en· W2471043967 on OpenAlexaff
Charlie Zhang, Jackson Chu, Kristy Cho, Jonathan Yang, Kevin McCartney, Kendall Ho

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCultural Competency in Health Care
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPreparednessEthnic groupDemographicsInterpreterCurriculumMedicineMedical educationCultural competenceFamily medicineLanguage barrierCross-sectional studyPsychologyNursingPedagogyPolitical science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.369
Teacher spread0.321 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicCultural Competency in Health CareFrench-language works237,207