Evaluation of inter-professional communication and leadership skills among graduating Canadian urology residents.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The importance of developing inter-professional communication and leadership skills among residents is well-recognized; however, formal tools to assess these skills are lacking. The goal of our study was to assess the leader and communicator roles in graduating urology residents using a validated self-assessment form developed for business students that focuses on inter-professional skills. METHODS: Chief residents (n=36) were evaluated with surveys of communication and leadership skills. The same surveys were administered through email to the residents' program directors (PDs). Resident self-assessment and PD assessment were compared using paired and non-paired t-tests. RESULTS: Graduating urology residents' self-assessment of their communication and leadership skills did not differ from assessments made by their PDs (77.6 vs. 74.4%; p=0.19); however, there were outlier candidates in whom PD assessment differed substantially from self-assessment on both surveys. Graduating urology residents scored themselves higher on self-awareness (82.6 vs. 77%; p= 0.05) and lower on stress management (67.7 vs. 77%; p= 0.01) compared to their PDs. Resident self-assessment scores were similar to business students on both communication and leadership surveys. Limitations were the small sample size and lack of survey evaluation by those surveyed. CONCLUSIONS: Graduating urology residents' self-assessment of their own communication and leadership skills did not differ greatly from assessment by their PDs or a sample of business students. Comparison of self-assessment evaluations and evaluations by PDs allowed us to identify outliers in whom self-assessment and PD-assessment markedly differed, which may allow for more focused and meaningful feedback.
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 | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".