Fellows’ Perspective of Educational Changes in Medical Sports Medicine During the COVID-19 Pandemic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background As a result of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, graduate medical education, along with most of daily life, was disrupted. The goal of this study was to explore the experiences of fellows in primary care/medical sports medicine (MSM) and view the changes made to training programs through their eyes. Methodology A questionnaire was developed to collect qualitative and quantitative data regarding the fellow's experiences in training from March to June 2020. Fellows on the American Medical Society for Sports Medicine list of current Sports Medicine Fellows in the United States and Canada were invited to participate. Of the 329 invited, 90 (27.4%) fellows returned questionnaires. Results MSM fellows highlighted positive adaptations as well as losses to their educational programs related to the pandemic. The biggest gain reported was additional learning time, and the greatest loss was to sports and event coverage. Most fellows reported attending collaborative sessions, and they noted an increase in didactics compared to pre-pandemic levels. The largest losses were noted in event coverage and training room exposures, with smaller declines in ultrasounds, procedures, and research experiences. They also described challenges, including changing clinical roles, managing social isolation and boredom, and balancing work and family responsibilities. Conclusions Fellows identified gains, losses, and challenges due to pandemic-related changes to their fellowship programs. Fellowship directors and educators in different fields can use this understanding of the fellows' experiences to build on current resources, further develop collaborative efforts, create new educational opportunities, and provide additional support for fellow learning.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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".