Comparison of Clerkship Directors’ Expectations of Physical Examination Skills with Point-of-care Ultrasound Skills Using the RIME Framework
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The expectations of point-of-care ultrasound (PoCUS) in undergraduate clerkship at the University of Ottawa has not been described. We compared clerkship directors’ expectations of physical examination skills with PoCUS skills, before and after completing the clerkship rotation. Methods: A pilot-tested, expert developed, bilingual on-line survey consisting of 15 questions was sent to all clerkship directors (23) in December 2019. The survey included questions regarding the expectations of medical students with respect to physical examination and PoCUS using the RIME Framework: none, reporter, interpreter, manager, educator. Results: The response rate was 60.9% (14/23). With regards to physical exam skills, 82.8% of directors had no expectations or expected students to be reporters when starting clerkship. At graduation, 77.5% of directors expected students to be interpreters, managers, or educators. For PoCUS, 100.0% of directors had no expectations or expected students to be reporters when starting clerkship. At clerkship completion, 33.0% of directors felt that students should be interpreters or managers for PoCUS skills. Conclusions: Clerkship directors have low expectations of PoCUS skills for entering and graduating clerks when compared with their physical examination skills despite formal pre-clerkship PoCUS objectives. Enhanced communication and targeted education of directors could improve the PoCUS curriculum.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".