Global health training in Canadian family medicine residency programmes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: Canadian family medicine (FM) residency programmes are responding to the growing demand to provide global health (GH) education to their trainees; herein, we describe the various GH activities (GHAs) offered within Canadian FM programmes. Design: A bilingual online survey was sent out to all 17 Canadian FM program directors (PDs) and/or an appointed GH representative. Setting: Online survey via Qualtrics. Participants: All 17 Canadian FM PDs and/or an appointed GH representative. Results: The response rate was 100% and represented 3250 first-year and second-year FM residents across English and French Canada. All schools stated that they participate in some form of GHAs. There was variation in the level of organisation, participation and types of GHAs offered. Overall, most GHAs are optional, and there is a large amount of variation in terms of resident participation. Approximately one third of programmes receive dedicated funding for their GHAs, and two thirds wish to increase the scope/variety of GHAs. Conclusion: These results suggest nationwide interest in developing a workforce trained in GH, but show great discrepancies in training, implementation and education.
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 | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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".