MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2517011060 · doi:10.1111/medu.13038

Dimensions of integration, continuity and longitudinality in clinical clerkships

2016· article· en· W2517011060 on OpenAlexaffabout
Rachel Ellaway, Lisa Graves, Beth‐Ann Cummings

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Education · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInnovations in Medical Education
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContext (archaeology)CurriculumThematic analysisDimension (graph theory)Medical educationPsychologyMathematics educationMedicineSociologyQualitative researchPedagogyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

CONTEXT: Over the past few decades, longitudinal integrated clerkships (LICs) have been proposed to address many perceived short-coming of traditional block clerkships. This growing interest in LICs has raised broader questions regarding the role of integration, continuity and longitudinality in medical education. A study with complementary theoretical and empirical dimensions was conducted to derive a more precise way of defining these three underlying concepts within the design of medical education curricula. METHODS: The theoretical dimension involved a thematic review of the literature on integration, continuity and longitudinality in medical education. The empirical dimension surveyed all 17 Canadian medical schools on how they have operationalised integration, continuity and longitudinality in their undergraduate programmes. The two dimensions were iteratively synthesised to explore the meaning and expression of integration, continuity and longitudinality in medical education curriculum design. RESULTS: Integration, continuity and longitudinality were expressed in many ways and forms, including: integration of clinical disciplines, combined horizontal integration and vertical integration, and programme-level integration. Types of continuity included: continuity of patients, continuity of teaching, continuity of location and peer continuity. Longitudinality focused on connected or repeating episodes of training or on connecting activities, such as encounter logging across educational episodes. Twelve of the 17 schools were running an LIC of some kind, although only one school had a mandatory LIC experience. An ordinal scale of uses of integration, continuity and longitudinality during clerkships was developed, and new definitions of these concepts in the clerkship context were generated. CONCLUSIONS: Different clerkship designs embodied different forms and levels of integration, continuity and longitudinality. A dichotomous view of LICs and rotation-based clerkships was found not to represent current practices in Canada, which instead tended to fall along a continuum of integration, continuity and longitudinality.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.027
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.595
Threshold uncertainty score0.981

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.027
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.420
Teacher spread0.385 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations37
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical EducationSame topicInnovations in Medical EducationFrench-language works237,207