Gender diversity training in Canadian paediatric postgraduate medical education: A needs assessment survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Evaluate the current state of postgraduate medical education on gender diversity in Canadian paediatric residency programs, exploring both resident and program director perceptions. BACKGROUND: Primary care providers are seeing more gender diverse children and youth in their offices, along with an exponential growth in referrals to Canadian specialty clinics and potential for significant mental health comorbidities. Gender-affirming support and management have been shown to improve overall outcomes. There is no mandatory curriculum on gender diversity for Canadian paediatric residency programs. METHODS: Cross-sectional online surveys in English and French distributed to program directors (PDs) and paediatric residents in the 17 Canadian paediatric residency programs. Data were analyzed by descriptive statistics with 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS: Response rate was 88.2% from PDs and 24.5% from paediatric residents. Among PDs, 14.3% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 6.3, 22.3) reported a formal curriculum for gender diversity teaching. Sixty-four per cent (53.3, 75.2) of PDs estimated their residents received ≤ 2 hours teaching on gender diversity. Residents reported comfort levels ≤ 50% on specific topics. Among residents, 73.8% (67.9, 79.6) reported that mandatory time in a gender diversity clinic would be the most effective teaching tool while PDs favoured an online module (66.7% [58.2, 75.1]). Barriers to more teaching included lack of time in a busy curriculum. Over 90% of resident indicated that more teaching on gender diversity is required. CONCLUSIONS: Significant variability in education on gender diversity is seen amongst Canadian paediatric residency programs. Discussion regarding a formal paediatric curriculum on gender diversity is needed.
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 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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 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".