MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2762503935 · doi:10.1093/pch/9.suppl_a.23a

17 Factors Influencing Medical Students' Choice of Residency Programs in Pediatrics

2004· article· en· W2762503935 on OpenAlexaffabout
TD Gelman, Amina Khambalia, C Macarthur, S Banner, Susan Tallett

Bibliographic record

VenuePaediatrics & Child Health · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDiversity and Career in Medicine
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLikert scaleFamily medicineMedical educationScale (ratio)MedicineQuality (philosophy)SpousePsychologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Considerable time, effort, and expense are involved in the interview and match process for medical students applying to residency programs in North America. However, little is known about the factors that students consider important when making their decision. This study was designed to identify and rank factors that influence medical students' ranking of Canadian postgraduate pediatric residency programs. A cross-sectional web-based survey was sent to 91 final year medical students who ranked a pediatric program as their first choice in the February 2003 Canadian residency match. Data on age, gender and status (single or in a committed relationship) were collected. The sixty-three item survey addressed six domains: geographic location, influence of spouse/significant other, interview process, perceived quality of education, furture career plans, and a miscellaneous domain. Responses were based on a 5-point Likert scale (1=not important; 5=very important). Sixty-six of the ninety-one (72%) final year medical students responded to the survey. Responses were analyzed separately for respondents who were single at the time of the match (n=27) and for respondents in a committed relationship (n=39). Among respondents reported as single, the domains most frequently rated as “very important” were geographic location (n=13, 48%) and perceived quality of education (n=10, 37%). Within the quality of education domain all single respondents rated resident perception of collegiality and support as “very important”. Among respondents in a committed relationship the domain for significant other was most frequently rated “very important” (n=17, 44%), within which, transferability and proximity were the most significant components. Perceived quality of education (n=12, 31% rated “very important”) and geography (n=9, 23% rated as “very important”) received the next highest number of ratings. Twenty-five (93%) single respondents and thirty-three (85%) respondents in a relationship reported that the interview process played a role in their decision making. Of the total group of respondents, forty (61%) stated that they would not be interested in a central interview process. Sixty-two (94%) applicants said they would not want to have a video interview. Program-specific and personal factors influence medical students' decision making in relation to their choice of pediatric residency program. This information may assist program directors in planning the selection process to accommodate the needs of 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)0.007
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 score0.055
Threshold uncertainty score0.109

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.308 · 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

Citations0
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePaediatrics & Child Health→Same topicDiversity and Career in Medicine→French-language works237,207→