Clerkship director confidence in medical student career advising in obstetrics and gynecology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Given the increasing complexities of the residency application processes, there is an ever-increasing need for faculty to serve in the role of fourth-year medical student career advisors. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to investigate obstetrics and gynecology clerkship directors' confidence and fulfillment with serving in the role of faculty career advisors. STUDY DESIGN: A 25-item electronic survey was developed and distributed to the 225 US obstetrics and gynecology clerkship directors in university-based and community-based medical schools with active memberships in the Association of Professors of Gynecology and Obstetrics. Items queried respondents on demographics, confidence in fourth-year advising, satisfaction with this aspect of their career, and resources used for advising. RESULTS: Of 225 clerkship directors, 143 (63.6%) responded to the survey. Nearly all clerkship directors (136/143 [95%]) reported advising fourth-year students. A median of 5.0 hours (interquartile range, 3.0-10.0) was spent per student in this advisory role, with 29 of 141 clerkship directors (20.5%) reporting some form of compensation for advising. Confidence in the ability to advise fourth-year medical students correlated significantly with number of years as a faculty, number of years as a clerkship director, and a higher full-time equivalent allotted as clerkship director. Fulfillment as a faculty career advisor was correlated with number of years as a clerkship director and a higher number of students advised. CONCLUSION: Obstetrics and gynecology clerkship directors regularly serve in the crucial role of faculty career advisor. Confidence in advising fourth-year students, advising fulfillment, and satisfaction with advising resources were all significantly correlated. We recommend that clerkship directors review resources available for advising and that they be provided academic time to serve as career advisors.
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 | 0.002 | 0.055 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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; 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".