MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3017788610 · doi:10.1111/medu.14203

Becoming a clinician: Trainee identity formation within the general practice supervisory relationship

2020· article· en· W3017788610 on OpenAlexfundno aff
James B. Brown, Helen Reid, Tim Dornan, Debra Nestel

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Education · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCounseling Practices and Supervision
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDepartment of Health and Aged Care, Australian GovernmentQueen's UniversityQueen's University Belfast
KeywordsSupervisorReciprocalIdentity (music)DialogicPsychologySocial psychologySocial identity theoryIdentity formationPedagogySocial groupSelf-conceptManagement

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: Becoming a clinician is a trajectory of identity formation in the context of supervised practice. This is a social process where the supervisory relationship is key. Therefore, to know how to support identity formation of clinical trainees, it is necessary to understand how this happens within the supervisory relationship. Our aim was to develop a conceptualisation of trainee identity formation within the general practice supervisory relationship to aid its support. METHODS: We took a critical realist approach using case study design and 'cultural worlds' theory as a conceptual frame. Each case comprised a general practice trainee and supervisor pair. Our data were weekly audiorecordings of interactions between trainee, supervisor and a patient over 12 weeks augmented by post-interaction reflections and sequential interviews. We undertook interpretive analysis using dialogic methods focusing on the doing of language and the cultural discourses expressed. RESULTS: We identified three social discourses centring on: clinical responsibility; ownership of clinical knowledge, and measures of trainee competency. Versions of these discourses defined four trainee-supervisor relational arrangements within which trainee and supervisor assumed reciprocal identities. We labelled these: junior learner and expert clinician; apprentice assistant and master coach, and lead clinician and advisor. We found a trajectory across these identity arrangements. Behind this trajectory was an invitation by the supervisor to the trainee into the social space of clinician and a readiness of the trainee to accept this invitation. Congruence in supervisor and trainee positioning was important. CONCLUSIONS: In the supervisory relationship, trainee and supervisor adopted reciprocal identities. For trainees to progress to identity of 'lead clinician,' supervisors needed to invite their trainee into this space and vacate it themselves. Congruence between supervisor positioning of their trainee and trainee authorship of themselves was important and was aided by explicit dialogue and common purpose. We offer a model and language for trainees, supervisors and departments or schools to facilitate this.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.009
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.121
GPT teacher head0.434
Teacher spread0.313 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations35
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical EducationSame topicCounseling Practices and SupervisionFrench-language works237,207