MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4307715092 · doi:10.1080/10826084.2022.2137815

Early Career Training in Addiction Medicine: A Qualitative Study with Health Professions Trainees Following a Specialized Training Program in a Canadian Setting

2022· article· en· W4307715092 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueSubstance Use & Misuse · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOpioid Use Disorder Treatment
Canadian institutionsSt. Paul's HospitalBritish Columbia Centre on Substance UseUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Institute on Drug AbuseCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsAddictionAddiction medicineQualitative researchEmpathyMedicineHealth careMedical educationPsychologyNursingFamily medicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: There has been a notable deficiency in the implementation of addiction science in clinical practice and many healthcare providers feel unprepared to treat patients with substance use disorders (SUD) following training. However, the perceptions of addiction medicine training by learners in health professions have not been fully investigated. This qualitative study explored perceptions of prior training in SUD care among early-career trainees enrolled in Addiction Medicine fellowships and electives in Vancouver, Canada. Methods: From April 2015 – August 2018, we interviewed 45 early-career physicians, social workers, nurses, and 17 medical students participating in training in addiction medicine. We coded transcripts inductively using qualitative data analysis software (NVivo 11.4.3). Results: Findings revealed six key themes related to early-career training in addiction medicine: (1) Insufficient time spent on addiction education, (2) A need for more structured addictions training, (3) Insufficient hands-on clinical training and skill development, (4) Lack of patient-centeredness and empathy in the training environment, (5) Insufficient implementation of evidence-based medicine, and (6) Prevailing stigmas toward addiction medicine. Conclusion: Early clinical training in addiction medicine appears insufficient and largely focused on symptoms, rather than etiology or evidence. Early career learners in health professions perceived benefit to expanding access to quality education and reported positive learning outcomes after completing structured training 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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.561
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.078
GPT teacher head0.385
Teacher spread0.307 · 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