Training family physicians as researchers: Outcomes over 15 years for Canada's first clinician scholar program.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To examine characteristics at admission and subsequent academic achievements among the graduates of the first 15 years of the clinician scholar program (CSP), Canada's longest-running such program, housed at the University of British Columbia in Vancouver. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study with data gathered from program files, personal correspondence, and public sources. SETTING: Vancouver. PARTICIPANTS: Graduates of the University of British Columbia CSP from 2001 to 2015. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Characteristics at admission (years since medical school graduation, previous graduate degrees) and measures of scholarly success (peer-reviewed publications, subsequent graduate degrees, and academic faculty appointments). RESULTS: = .04). CONCLUSION: We found family physicians interested in becoming researchers were usually highly experienced, with physicians entering the CSP a median of 12 years (interquartile range 8 to 19 years) after medical school graduation. Most went on to publish several papers and more than 20% maintained a productivity of more than 2 peer-reviewed papers per year. The mentorship program model during this first 15 years has been effective in training family physicians to begin clinician scholar careers, and has been built upon, with the introduction from 2013 to 2015 of an enhanced curriculum. Future quantitative and qualitative analysis of this program and others is important to better articulate the success of clinician scholars striving to understand and improve primary care and health for Canadians.
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 | 0.004 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".