MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Developing and Successfully Implementing a Competency-Based Portfolio Assessment System in a Postgraduate Family Medicine Residency Program

2015· article· en· W412933501 on OpenAlexaff
Laura April McEwen, Jane Griffiths, Karen Schultz

Bibliographic record

VenueAcademic Medicine · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInnovations in Medical Education
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPortfolioAuditMedical educationAttendanceProfessional developmentIdentification (biology)PsychologyMedicineBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The use of portfolios in postgraduate medical residency education to support competency development is increasing; however, the processes by which these assessment systems are designed, implemented, and maintained are emergent. The authors describe the needs assessment, development, implementation, and continuing quality improvement processes that have shaped the Portfolio Assessment Support System (PASS) used by the postgraduate family medicine program at Queen's University since 2009. Their description includes the impetus for change and contextual realities that guided the effort, plus the processes used for selecting assessment components and developing strategic supports. The authors discuss the identification of impact measures at the individual, programmatic, and institutional levels and the ways the department uses these to monitor how PASS supports competency development, scaffolds residents' self-regulated learning skills, and promotes professional identity formation. They describe the "academic advisor" role and provide an appendix covering the portfolio elements. Reflection elements include learning plans, clinical question logs, confidence surveys, and reflections about continuity of care and significant incidents. Learning module elements cover the required, online bioethics, global health, and consult-request modules. Assessment elements cover each resident's research project, clinical audits, presentations, objective structured clinical exam and simulated office oral exam results, field notes, entrustable professional activities, multisource feedback, and in-training evaluation reports. Document elements are the resident's continuing medical education activities including procedures log, attendance log, and patient demographic summaries.The authors wish to support others who are engaged in the systematic portfolio-design process or who may adapt aspects of PASS for their local programs.

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)0.035
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.052
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.188

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0350.052
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.090
GPT teacher head0.442
Teacher spread0.352 · 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

Citations52
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAcademic MedicineSame topicInnovations in Medical EducationFrench-language works237,207