Recommendations for POCUS Curriculum in Canadian Undergraduate Medical Education: Consensus from the Inaugural Seguin Canadian POCUS Education Conference
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Point of care ultrasound (POCUS) in Canadian undergraduate medical education (UGME) is limited. To address this paucity, the inaugural Seguin Canadian POCUS Education Conference hosted 14 of the 17 Canadian medical schools to develop a list of recommendations for POCUS education in Canadian UGME. Attending schools were divided into delegations consisting of a pre-clerkship student, a clerkship student and a staff physician. Recommendations were developed via a modified consensus development panel. Delegations submitted school-specific POCUS education summary documents for roundtable discussions, which yielded an initial set of recommendations. These were then summarized in a large group setting and voted upon for adoption with an a priori agreement threshold of 80%. Conference attendees developed 14 recommendations which 87% of participants agreed to adopt. Conference recommendations reflect the opinions of Canadian trainees and POCUS education experts thus serving as a framework for UGME POCUS education in Canada.
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 | 0.093 | 0.166 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.009 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".