Survey of Integrative Veterinary Medicine Training in AVMA-Accredited Veterinary Colleges
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A survey approved by the Association of American Veterinary Medical Colleges was sent to the academic deans of all 49 accredited veterinary colleges to obtain information on educational programs offered in integrative veterinary medicine (IVM). Results were compared to a previous survey with a similar design performed 7 years earlier. Survey responses were received from 43 of 49 institutions (87.8%). Thirteen respondents (30.2%) reported offering a formal course in IVM, 33 (76.7%) offered some level of instruction in the curriculum, and 32 (74.4%) provided clinical services in IVM. The most common IVM topics covered in the curriculum were rehabilitation and acupuncture. Dedicated courses in IVM had decreased since the previous survey, although faculty trained in at least one aspect of IVM increased. Clinical services incorporating IVM were present in the majority of veterinary teaching hospitals. Further investigation is required to determine the effectiveness of current IVM training in preparing veterinary graduates to discuss or utilize IVM in practice.
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 | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".