Emergency Medicine In-Training Examination Scores are Not Associated with Burnout and Not Affected by the Introduction of a Wellness Curriculum
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: There is little research examining the relationship between burnout and medical knowledge. Study Objectives: The authors sought to determine if emergency medicine (EM) resident performance on the In-Training Examination (EM-ITE) is associated with burnout and if EM-ITE scores are affected by the implementation of a wellness curriculum. Methods: As part of a multi-institution prospective education intervention trial, the Maslach Burnout Inventory, a valuable tool in the assessment of physician burnout, was administered at 10 EM residencies in February 2017. Then, five intervention sites introduced a year-long wellness curriculum. The MBI was re-administered at all sites in August 2017 and February 2018. The EM-ITE, an instrument for medical knowledge assessment, was administered in February 2017 and February 2018 at all sites. Results: 285/382 (75%) residents participated in the February 2017 data collection; 247/386 (64%) participated in August 2017; and 228/386 (59%) participated in February 2018. EM-ITE scores were reported for 296/383 (77.5%) residents for 2017 and 304/386 (78.8%) residents for 2018. There was no association between change in mean EM-ITE scores at the intervention sites compared to the control sites. In the subset of 172 residents who completed the 2017 and 2018 MBI, there was no correlation between burnout and changes in EM-ITE scores. Conclusion: In this study of EM residents, burnout was not associated with resident medical knowledge acquisition and change in EM resident medical knowledge was not affected by the introduction of a wellness curriculum.
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 | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".