Improving Leadership in Family Medicine Residents : Development of a Workshop and a Field Note
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Context: Although the CanMEDS include a leader role, specific leadership competency training is lacking in family medicine residency in Quebec and Canada. Objective: To increase the awareness about the leadership competency in family medicine residents. Study design and Analysis: It is a multi-method study using a questionnaire and qualitative semi-structured interviews. Setting: GMF-U Charles-LeMoyne, a family medicine training clinic with 35 residents and 25 attending family medicine physicians and teachers. Population Studied: The residents, the primary care health professionals and the clinician teachers of the clinic. Intervention: Using the Kern framework for curriculum development, a workshop of two hours intended for residents and clinician teachers was elaborated. It was presented in March 2022 to residents at the GMF-U Charles-LeMoyne. The workshop used methods of participative co-learning and aimed at the appropriation of theoretical concepts relative to clinical leadership through the analysis of examples and situations lived by participants. It was structured around a field note designed for observation of positive leadership actions. Outcome measures: Right after the workshop, participants evaluated their reaction, learning and anticipated change in behaviour with a questionnaire including open questions and 26 Likert scale questions. A semi-structured group interview two months after the workshop also took place with the residents (PGY1) to evaluate the appreciation and use of the field note. Results: 9 residents (PGY1), 12 clinician teachers and 1 nurse practitioner attended the workshop. 9 people answered the questionnaire and they all evaluated positively the workshop regarding its content, relevance, structure, animation and participation. All respondents claimed they would use the acquired knowledge in their practice. The residents who participated the semi-directed group interview said the field note was still not used much and suggested we offer the workshop to the psychosocial team so that they can help provide field notes when they participate in direct observation. Conclusions: This workshop and field note answer a normative need in the family medicine curriculum through the facilitation of “conscious” leadership in the residents’ professional activities. This formation also contributes as an activity for faculty development. This educative activity will be given to other family medicine units who showed interest.
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 | 0.025 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
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".