Voices of Distress: The Emotional Peril of Not Attaining a Dietetic Internship in Ontario
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Obtaining dietetic licensure in Ontario requires completion of a Dietitians of Canada (DC) accredited four-year undergraduate degree in nutrition and an accredited post-graduate internship or combined Master’s degree program. Given the scarcity of internship positions in Ontario, each year approximately two-thirds of the eligible applicants who apply do not receive a position (Brady, Hoang, Tzianetas, Buccino, Glynn, & Gingras, 2012). Anecdotally, not securing an internship position is known to be a particularly disconcerting experience that has significant consequences for individuals’ personal, financial, and professional well being. However, no known interpretive research has yet explored students’ experiences of being unsuccessful in applying for internship positions. Fifteen individuals who applied between 2005 and 2009 to an Ontario-based dietetic internship program, but were unsuccessful at least once, participated in a one-on-one semi-structured interview. Findings reveal that participants’ experiences unfold successively in four phases that are characterized by increasingly heightened emotional peril: naïveté, competition, devastation, and frustration. The authors conclude that the current model of dietetic education and training in Ontario causes lasting distress to students and hinders the future growth and vitality of the dietetic profession. Further research is required to understand the impact of the current model on dietetic educators, internship coordinators, and preceptors as participants in the internship application process.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.019 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".