MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2972045879 · doi:10.1097/upj.0000000000000096

How Often is Digital Rectal Examination Performed? Is it Still Taught to Medical Students?

2019· article· en· W2972045879 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueUrology Practice · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInnovations in Medical Education
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRectal examinationMedicineCurriculumMedical educationPhysical examinationUrologyProstateInternal medicinePsychologyPedagogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Digital rectal examination is an essential skill. However, it is not clear how often it is performed by AUA (American Urological Association) members or if it is still taught in medical school. METHODS: Two web based surveys were administered to AUA members (practicing urologists and residents/fellows) and medical student members of the AUA. The surveys inquired how often digital rectal examination was performed, when and how it was taught, and how the AUA could promote it. RESULTS: There were 331 responses from AUA members and 160 responses from medical students. Most (64%) AUA members performed digital rectal examination on at least 50% of male patients. When respondents were subdivided according to the median age of 36 years, AUA members older than 36 years performed significantly more routine digital rectal examinations while those 36 years old or younger relied significantly more on prostate specific antigen screening (p <0.001). While few medical schools had a mandatory urology rotation, 89% of students reported that digital rectal examination was a required component of their medical school education and it was taught during the second year. While 81% of medical students were aware of the AUA Medical Student Curriculum only 43% of them were aware that the AUA has videos instructing students on digital rectal examination. Finally, AUA members and students provided insight as to how the AUA could promote digital rectal examination. CONCLUSIONS: This study underscores the importance and general attitude of AUA members and students toward the digital rectal examination. In the future the AUA could further develop clinical guidelines, content and educational videos with particular emphasis on augmenting medical student education on digital rectal examination.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.028
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.213
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.028
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.342 · 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