MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3134032776 · doi:10.1093/jcag/gwab002.090

A92 PREVIOUS VIRTUAL CONSULTATION EXPERIENCE IS RELATED TO PRECEPTOR’S WILLINGNESS TO INVOLVE TRAINEES IN VIRTUAL CARE DURING THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC

2021· article· en· W3134032776 on OpenAlexaff
Lily Olayinka, Gilaad G. Kaplan, Leanne Reeb, Remo Panaccione, Karen I. Kroeker

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTelemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTelehealthPandemicMedicineFamily medicineHealth carePreceptorTest (biology)TelemedicineNursingCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Disease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background The COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated the need for healthcare service reform in order to reduce the risk of transmission of SARS-CoV-2 infection between patients, healthcare providers and medical trainees. Gastroenterologists have been challenged to adopt to virtual consultations and accommodate medical trainees in their virtual clinics. Aims To assess the impact of virtual care on medical education during the COVID-19 pandemic Methods A REDCap survey was disseminated among gastroenterology providers via email. The subsection of the survey on medical education consisted of 4 questions pertaining to inclusion of trainees in virtual clinics, type of virtual clinic, observation method and an open-ended question for additional comments. Quantitative data was analyzed using IBM SPSS Statistics 27 and qualitative theme analysis was applied for short answer responses. Results Of the 24 respondents that completed the survey, only 6 (25%) had trainees involved in their clinics (Table 1). The type of clinic consultations conducted were telephone only (50%), a combination of telephone, video and hospital-base telehealth (33.3%) and hospital-based telehealth only (16.7%). There was an equal split between direct and indirect observations. Preceptors that had previous experience with virtual consultation prior to the pandemic, were more likely to include trainees in their virtual clinics (66.6% vs 33.4%; Fisher’s exact test, p=0.033). For preceptors who included trainees in their virtual clinics, their overall satisfaction averaged 0.51 points lower (95% CI: 0.19–0.84, p=0.004). Concerns identified were lack of trainee engagement, adequate remuneration for healthcare providers, and lack of training for trainee and preceptors on how to navigate virtual platforms. Conclusions This survey demonstrates that gastroenterologists with previous experience with virtual clinics are more likely to accommodate trainees in their virtual clinics. However, involving trainees seem to reduce preceptor’s satisfaction with virtual clinic. Our findings suggest that there is a need to provide telemedicine training for both educators and trainees, in order to alleviate concerns and promote its adoption as organizations seek to continue to provide high-quality medical education while providing virtual care. Funding Agencies None

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.038
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.051

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.038
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.001

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.296 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology→Same topicTelemedicine and Telehealth Implementation→French-language works237,207→