The next generation of researchers: <scp>One‐year</scp> outcome data from the <scp>SAEM Advanced Research Methodology Evaluation and Design in Medical Education</scp> ( <scp>ARMED MedEd</scp> ) program
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: As the field of medical education evolves, there is a need to increase the quality of education scholarship and develop a cadre of research scholars; however, clinician educators (CEs) considering this career transition have limited formal training in education research methodology to heed this call. Therefore, a program that provides more advanced training in education scholarship for CEs without the financial and resource barriers of fellowships and masters programs is needed. Methods: The SAEM Advanced Research Methodology Evaluation and Design in Medical Education (ARMED MedEd) program is a longitudinal program for the beyond-beginner CE, seeking advanced training in education research. The program was created using a comprehensive needs assessment and included longitudinal training; small-group projects; dedicated project mentors; and integrated diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives. Program participants applied for a grant upon program completion. Results: Twenty-one participants completed the course with 100% completing the baseline survey and 67% (14/21) completing the end-of-program survey. Participants reported improved perception of knowledge across all of the topics with a medium to large effect size, ranging from 0.40 to 0.62. When asked about impact on their network of potential collaborators, participants reported a median of 7 (interquartile range [IQR] 5-8) out of 9. When asked about the impact on their community of practice, participants reported a median of 7 (IQR 5-7) out of 9. When asked about the impact on their professional identity, participants reported a median of 7 (IQR 4-9) out of 9. Participants also reported an increase in both the quantity (mean of 2 ± 1 new mentors) and the quality (median score 7 [IQR 5-8] out of 9) of new research mentorship as a result of the program. Open-ended feedback was generally positive, with 100% reporting they would advise others to take this program. Conclusions: The SAEM ARMED MedEd program represents a proof of concept for an advanced education research program seeking to fill the research training gap for the beyond-beginner Clinician educators.
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 | 0.036 | 0.154 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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".