Transition to practice curriculum for general internal medicine physicians: scoping review and Canadian national survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There remains a paucity of evidence for curricula for the transition to practice (TTP) stage of Competence by Design internal medicine (IM) training programs. Current entrustable professional activities are based on expert consensus rather than robust subspecialty-specific needs assessment. METHODS: A scoping review was completed to identify studies with TTP focus. A national survey was conducted to identify transition experiences for general internal medicine physicians. Results were assessed by grounded theory analysis to identify core topics for TTP curricula. RESULTS: Neither scoping review nor national survey identified TTP topics related to the CanMEDS Medical Expert role. Scoping Review: 41 relevant studies were identified. Most (97.6%) were from North America. The most common study types were observational (survey) or curriculum (13/41 31.7% for each). Only two studies were exclusively in IM, and the most common subspecialty studied was surgical (13/41, 31.7%). The most common TTP topics were mentorship, billing and coding, practice management, negotiating contract and job, and financial aspects of practice. National Survey: There were 44 respondents, with the majority (25/44, 56.8%) having completed an IM subspecialty fellowship. Most (38/44) completed medical school in Canada, and most were from academic practice settings (33/44, 75.0%). The most common TTP topics were billing and coding, personal financial planning, practice management, work-life balance and mentorship. Grounded Theory Analysis: There were six themes that encompassed all TTP topics from the scoping review and national survey, being (i) building a career, (ii) continuing professional development, (iii) expectations of the profession, (iv) practice management, (v) Life, health and well-being and (vi) clinical skills. Curriculum competencies and resources for curriculum development were provided. CONCLUSIONS: This study identifies topics critical for curricula development for IM transition to practice. Further research is required to evaluate effectiveness of curricula including topics and themes developed from this scoping review and national survey.
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 | 0.004 | 0.036 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".