Investigating the importance of clinical topics for developing a curriculum on gastroenterology for pediatric residents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Focused objectives provide effective learning. Pediatric residents in Canada follow objectives set by the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada (RCPSC) with the goal of becoming competent general pediatricians. During the gastroenterology rotation, it remains unclear as to what clinical problems listed in the aforementioned objectives are crucial to understand as part of general pediatric practice. The purpose of this study was to identify the gastroenterological conditions of most importance to incorporate into a focused curriculum for pediatric residents. METHODS: All pediatricians across four Canadian Atlantic provinces were surveyed by a mailed questionnaire. Questions included demographics and ranking of the 14 clinical problems currently listed in the RCPSC objectives along with six more generated after input was gained from pediatric gastroenterologists. RESULTS: Of the 234 pediatricians surveyed, 132 (56%) responded, 48% of whom were general pediatricians. Celiac disease, gastroesophageal reflux, and obesity (currently not on the RCPSC list) were identified as important/very important conditions to understand by 94.4%, 96.1%, and 96.0% of respondents, respectively. There were no significant differences in rankings between general pediatricians and subspecialists. A large majority recommended that a rotation in gastroenterology be mandatory during pediatric residency. CONCLUSIONS: Pediatricians from four Canadian Atlantic provinces recommended a list of gastrointestinal conditions to be included in pediatric residency training. It would be important to consider these recommendations to keep the training curriculum in sync with real world needs.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".