Oncology education for internal medicine residents: The value of participating in a medical oncology rotation.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
e18175 Background: Despite the high incidence and prevalence of cancer, medical oncology (MO) rotations are not mandatory in a majority of Canadian internal medicine (IM) training programs. The purpose of this study was to clarify the value of a MO rotation for IM residents. Methods: IM residents scheduled for a MO rotation at BC Cancer Agency (BCCA, Vancouver), Princess Margaret Cancer Centre (PMCC, Toronto), Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre (SOCC, Toronto), Tom Baker Cancer Centre (TBCC, Calgary) were asked by e-mail to participate in pre- and post-rotation surveys regarding attitudes toward a MO rotation and general cancer knowledge. Responses pre- versus post-rotation were compared. Results: Between January 2013 and December 2015 68 IM residents completed the pre-rotation survey and 48 (71%) the post-rotation survey. Responses were received from 22 IM residents at TBCC, 9 BCCA, 9 SOCC and 8 PMCC. Residents spent 78% of their rotation in outpatient clinics, 15% with inpatient care and 7% emergency room assessments. Cancer-related learning during the rotations was mostly acquired from MO physicians in clinic (36%), while self-directed learning accounted for 34%. 52% of IM residents believed MO should be a mandatory rotation. When asked to rate their comfort level in dealing with cancer patients and patients at end-of-life (out of 5), mean scores improved from 3.2 to 4.0 (p < 0.001) and 3.6 to 4.0 (p = 0.003), respectively. Mean score on the knowledge assessment improved from 77% pre-rotation to 85% post-rotation (p = 0.003). The most important topics to be learned during an MO rotation are: 1) Common complications of cancer/oncologic emergencies; 2) Common complications of cancer treatment; 3) General approach to diagnosis in a patient with suspected cancer; 4) General principles of treating cancer; 5) Management of common malignancies. Conclusions: A MO rotation for IM residents improves comfort level in dealing with cancer patients and patients at end-of-life. Overall cancer-specific knowledge also improved. Given these benefits, IM training programs should consider a mandatory MO rotation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".