MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2987420468 · doi:10.1136/leader-2019-fmlm.20

20 The masterclass series in family doctor leadership: evaluation of a new approach to leadership development

2019· article· en· W2987420468 on OpenAlexaffabout
David White, Rick Glazier, Danielle Martin, Marla Shapiro, Cynthia Whitehead, Sara Crann, June Carroll, Risa Freeman, Michael Kidd

Bibliographic record

VenuePoster · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInnovations in Medical Education
Canadian institutionsThe Wilson CentreInstitute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesSinai Health SystemCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchSt. Michael's HospitalWomen's College HospitalUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFacilitatorThematic analysisMedical educationPsychologyQualitative researchFraming (construction)Qualitative propertyMedicineComputer scienceSociologySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Context Leadership is essential for quality improvement in family medicine. Objective To assess whether the Master Class approach to developing ‘rising stars’ in performing arts is effective in developing emerging leaders in academic family medicine. Design Mixed Methods, combining quantitative evaluation of five sessions and qualitative assessment of participants’ pre-course assignments and post-course interviews. Setting The Department of Family & Community Medicine (DFCM) at the University of Toronto, comprising 14 academic sites, multiple community practices and over 1,700 faculty.Participants: Sixteen ‘rising star’ DFCM leaders, identified by site Chiefs and Program Directors. Intervention Five 2-hour evening sessions over ten weeks, each conducted by a different DFCM facilitator with internationally recognized leadership in varied domains. Outcome measures Qualitative assessment of pre-course descriptions by participants of one of their current challenges, quantitative ratings of each session and qualitative assessment of impact on participants. The problem descriptions and interviews were assessed using descriptive thematic analysis. Results The participants’ descriptions of their leadership challenges revealed significant variation in level of complexity, scope, and framing of the issues. Evaluations of individual sessions were uniformly high, yielding a combined average of all elements of 4.72/5. Analysis of participant interviews at 2–4 months post-course revealed the following themes: impact or potential for impact on their work; most effective aspects; least effective aspects; participant expectations; suggestions for improvement; impact on self-perception as leaders; broader perceptions of leadership approaches; and acquisition of specific skills. Conclusion The Master Class approach can be adapted to developing rising leaders in family medicine and may be broadly applicable to healthcare leadership development.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.090

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.287
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.074 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePosterSame topicInnovations in Medical EducationFrench-language works237,207