The Role of Learning Style in the Changing Landscape of Medical Education: The Canadian Plastic Surgery Experience
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: The transition to competency-based education and restraints on trainee work hours necessitates re-evaluation of resident education. The role of learning style in plastic surgery residency training has not been investigated. The objective of this study was to identify the learning styles of plastic surgeons and trainees in Canadian Plastic Surgery programs.
 Methods: A cross-sectional electronic survey was distributed to all members of the Canadian Society of Plastic Surgeons and through program directors at Canadian training programs. Basic demographics were captured. The Kolb Learning Style Inventory was used to identify each individual’s learning style (converging, accommodative, assimilative, or divergent). 
 Results: There were a total of 98 respondents (15% response rate), including 62 staff plastic surgeons (63%) and 36 trainees (37%). All regions of Canada and age categories were well represented. The most dominant learning styles were convergent (47%) and accommodative (29%). No significant difference in dominant learning styles existed between age groups; while males were more commonly convergent learners, females were accommodative learners. 
 Conclusions: The majority of plastic surgery trainees and staff have learning styles that rely heavily on practical application and experiential learning. Accounting for this propensity towards convergent and accommodative learning styles should be incorporated into training programs to maximize efficacy of learning.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".