Harmony or dissonance? The affordances of palliative care learning for emerging professional identity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Patient demographics demand physicians who are competent in and embrace palliative care as part of their professional identity. Published literature describes ways that learners acquire knowledge, skills and attitudes for palliative care. These studies are, however, limited by their focus on the individual where learning is about acquisition. Viewing learning as a process of becoming through the interplay of individual, social relationships and cultures, offers a novel perspective from which to explore the affordances for professional identity development. METHODS: Qualitative narrative methods were used to explore 45 narratives of memorable learning (NMLs) for palliative care recounted by 14 graduating family medicine residents in one family medicine residency program. Thematic and narrative analyses identified the affordances that support and constrain the dynamic emergence of professional identity. RESULTS: Participants recounted affordances that supported and/or constrained their learning acting on personal (e.g. past experiences of death), interpersonal (e.g. professional support) and systemic (e.g. patient continuity) levels. Opportunities for developing professional identity were dynamic: factors acted in harmony, were misaligned, or colliding to support or constrain an emerging professional identity for palliative care practice. CONCLUSION: Findings highlight how individual factors interplay with interpersonal and structural conditions in the workplace in dynamic and emergent ways that may support or constrain the emergence of professional identity. Viewing learning as a process of becoming allows teachers, curriculum developers and administrators to appreciate the complexity and importance of the interplay between the individual and the workplace affordances to create environments that nurture professional identity for palliative care 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 | 0.000 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".