Identifying essential procedural skills in Canadian undergraduate medical education
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: We conducted a national survey to characterize current Canadian procedural skills training in Undergraduate Medical Education (UGME). The goals were to identify the most important procedures students should know upon graduation and assess clinician-educator perceptions regarding implementation of a pre-clerkship procedural program. METHODS: We distributed the survey to physician-educators across Canada's 17 medical schools. Respondents were directed to an individualized survey that collected demographic data, physician-educator responses on essential procedural skills, as well as physician-educator opinions on the value of a pre-clerkship procedural training program. RESULTS: The response rate for this survey was 21% (42 out of 201 distributed surveys were completed). The top 10 most important procedures identified by physician-educators included IV Access, Airway Management, Local anesthesia/field block, Casting, Spontaneous Vaginal Delivery, Testing for STIs, Phlebotomy, Suturing of Lacerations, Nasogastric Tube Insertion, and Venipuncture. Physician-educators supported a pre-clerkship procedural program. CONCLUSIONS: Identifying the most crucial procedural skills is the first step in implementing a competency-based procedural skills training program for Canadian medical students. With the list of essential skills, and the support for physician-educators in developing a pre-clerkship procedural skills curriculum, hopefully there can be future development of formalized curricula.
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 | 0.068 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.035 | 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".