MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2563330943 · doi:10.1002/pra2.2016.14505301068

An informed transition? International medical graduates settling in the united states and canada

2016· article· en· W2563330943 on OpenAlexaffabout
Wajanat Rayes, Aqueasha Martin‐Hammond, Anita Komlódi, Nadia Caidi, Nicole Sundin

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Association for Information Science and Technology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGlobal Health Workforce Issues
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSettlingTransition (genetics)Political scienceEnvironmental scienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT International medical graduates (IMGs) are medical professionals who have immigrated to the United States (US) or Canada (Ca) in hopes of integrating into the labor market. IMGs can be a very helpful resource supplying a diverse background and expertise to the medical system in the host country [Chen et al., ]. However, immigration and integration into a new country can be difficult processes due to differences in cultural norms, information sources, and information dissemination. In this study, we investigate the nature of information in the lived experiences of IMGs as they make a new life for themselves and their families in either the US or Canada. By so doing, we contribute to the limited body of research on this population by providing an informational perspective. Semi‐structured interviews were conducted with 20 IMGs residing in the US or Canada. Our findings indicate that IMGs spend an inordinate amount of time searching for occupational and employment‐related information, which includes information about retraining and residency programs, along with varied strategies to make sense of the new information landscapes. IMGs use various strategies to identify signposts and become conversant in the new landscape. Despite the limited sample, it becomes clear that one's ability to become literate in these new information environments leads to more positive outcomes (i.e., integrating the labor market, overall well‐being, belonging).

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)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.549
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.340 · 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.

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

Citations12
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Association for Information Science and TechnologySame topicGlobal Health Workforce IssuesFrench-language works237,207