MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3038227055 · doi:10.1136/leader-2019-000205

Leadership training in family medicine residency: a scoping review

2020· review· en· W3038227055 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Leader · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInnovations in Medical Education
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMentorshipCurriculumMedical educationLeadership developmentInclusion (mineral)Graduate medical educationFeelingFaculty developmentPsychologyResidency trainingMedicineMEDLINEProfessional developmentPedagogyPolitical sciencePublic relations

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Graduate medical education, including family medicine residency, has historically focused on building clinical competencies with little attention paid to leadership skills, leaving residents feeling ill-prepared for leadership roles after training. Objective To analyse the format, content and outcomes of leadership training programmes offered to family medicine residents. Methods A MEDLINE (OvidSP) literature search from 1976 to October 2018 for articles on Family Medicine AND Residency AND Leadership Programs retrieved 184 articles. After reviewing inclusion and exclusion criteria, 12 articles were chosen for full review and synthesis. Results Three articles described leadership training available to Family Medicine all residents while nine focused on a select group. Programme format and content varied, ranging from a 1-day programme on emotional intelligence to a 5-year integrated leadership track. The most comprehensive curricula were longitudinal and offered to a small group of residents. Inclusive programmes often taught leadership through the lens of a specific competency. Mixed teaching methods were valued including online learning, simulations, small group discussions, mentorship, reflection, placements and projects. Conceptual frameworks were inconsistently used and programme evaluation seldom addressed high-level or long-term outcomes. Conclusions Leadership skills are important for all family physicians; however, there is limited literature on comprehensive leadership development during training. Existing curricula were described in this review and we suggest a longitudinal mixed-methods programme integrated throughout residency, covering basic comprehensive skills for all residents. However, evaluative data were limited, and a considerable gap remains in how to effectively approach leadership development in family medicine residency, warranting ongoing research.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.641
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.604
GPT teacher head0.547
Teacher spread0.057 · 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