A206 STATE OF THE NATION: ADULT GASTROENTEROLOGY TRAINING IN CANADA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada provides objectives in procedural skills, medical knowledge, and CanMEDS roles required for certification in gastroenterology. The means by which this is achieved is at the discretion of the training programs. The aim of this study was to evaluate the Canadian adult gastroenterology training experience from a resident perspective in light of the upcoming transition to competency based medical education (CBME) and need for more standardization in training. A survey consisting of seven sections and 35 questions was distributed to Chief Residents (CR) at all 14 adult training programs. Continuous variables were analyzed with mean, median, and range. Eleven out of 14 CR responded to the survey. Median number of trainees per site was 6, with an average of 3 hospital sites. Majority of programs (8/11) were admitting, with a median (range) of 8 admitted patients (0–45). Median inpatient exposure was 36 weeks (10–104) and outpatient exposure 15 weeks (2–70). Mean number of call shifts per block was 7, including on average, one weekend. Residents were called into hospital on average 50% of the time, with a mean of 5 hours of sleep per call shift. Most CR felt they were unable to take a post-call day but all respondents felt supported by staff on call. Staff were available for the resident call rota at 5/11 programs. Mandatory rotations were highly variable, with the one constant across all programs being inpatient consults. All but one program provided core training in percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tubes, while only 4 provided training in endoscopic manometry, despite it being a Royal College requirement. The majority of programs provided accommodation for residents writing the Internal Medicine Royal College Exam. Only 6/11 programs provided specific gastroenterology Royal College Exam preparation and 6/11 CR did not feel they received adequate career counselling. Despite this, nearly all residents (10/11) were satisfied with their program. The most common area of suggested improvement was increased access to outpatient endoscopy lists. Each gastroenterology training program in Canada is unique and provides a slightly different training experience. Mandatory rotations are heterogeneous and core procedures vary widely. Despite this, the vast majority of residents were satisfied with their program. The incoming transition to CBME provides an ideal juncture to re-evaluate and standardize aspects of gastroenterology training in Canada. None
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
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".