Career medical officers in psychiatry and addiction in NSW: description, role and educational needs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To describe the workforce of career medical officers (CMOs) working in psychiatry and addiction medicine across New South Wales (NSW) and to explore their training and education needs, and experience of their role. METHOD: A cross-sectional survey of CMOs in NSW working in psychiatry or addiction medicine. The survey consisted of quantitative data and free-text responses, and was conducted online in late 2017. RESULTS: Of the 41 CMOs identified and sent the survey link, 25 CMOs completed the survey (61% RR). Almost half had worked as a CMO for 11 years or longer. Only six respondents held a recognised senior CMO position. Common areas of expertise were clozapine, metabolic health, and electroconvulsive therapy (ECT). One-quarter of respondents did not receive supervision. Suggested education and training improvements included an annual 1-day training symposium and monthly peer review group for CMOs. CONCLUSION: CMOs are an often senior group of clinicians working in important areas of service provision. Ongoing educational support for this group of medical practitioners is prudent to ensure the delivery of best practice mental health and drug health care.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 teacher head, 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".