P.176 Assessing the competence of neurology residents in performing an interphysician telephone consultation.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Neurology Residency training in Canada is transitioning to competence based medical education (CBME) in July 2020 and the Royal College Neurology Specialty Committee has identified “providing consultation for and managing patients at outlying centers,” to be an entrustable professional activity (EPA). At Western, neurology telephone consultations, from outlying centres, are attended by both the resident and the staff Neurologist. This scenario provides the ideal situation for direct observation and immediate formative feedback. The resident’s performance is assessed using the ’TeleTool’ which utilizes an entrustment scale and has a short narrative portion. Methods: This mixed methods study aims to determine the reliability and validity of the ’TeleTool’ in assessing the performance of the telephone consultation by senior neurology residents. Informed consent was obtained from residents (9) and staff (7) involved. Scores on the entrustment scale and narrative comments were analysed. Results: Information on 30 encounters (involving 9 residents) was collected. TeleTool results demonstrated higher entrustment scores in PGY4 and PGY5 levels. Overall, ratings were consistent across the 7 consultants assessors. Conclusions: The TeleTool was reliable and valid in assessing competence in the telephone consultation and will be a useful tool for assessment of this EPA.
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 | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".