MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4386327604 · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-3204004/v1

Developing a National UGME Pain Management and Substance Use Disorder Curriculum to Address the Opioid Crisis: A Program Evaluation Pilot Study

2023· preprint· en· W4386327604 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Nancy Dalgarno, Jennifer Turnnidge, Nicholas Cofie, Richard van Wylick, Jeanne Mulder, Fran Kirby, Amber Hastings‐Truelove, Lisa Graves

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Square · 2023
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInnovations in Medical Education
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersHealth Canada
KeywordsCurriculumMedical educationMedicinePsychologyPedagogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Pain is one of the most common reasons for adults to seek health care, yet educational program focused on pain are often underrepresented in medical school curricula. In January 2021, the Association of Faculties of Medicine of Canada (AFMC) launched an online national, bilingual, competency-based curriculum for undergraduate medical (UGME) students in pain management and substance use in response to the opioid crisis to bridge the content gaps in programs across Canada. The purpose of this study is to evaluation the pilot of this national curriculum. Methods Undergraduate medical education students (n = 168) from across Canada participated in the program evaluation of a pilot which ran from September to November 2020. Participants completed online pre- and post-program surveys that assessed the influence of the curriculum on participants’ knowledge as well as the value, usability, and feasibility of this curriculum. Results Participants’ perceived confidence their new knowledge and in utilizing resources required to maintain their knowledge significantly increased (75% and 51% respectively). Their perceived knowledge that addressed the 72 learning objectives within the curriculum significantly increased from pre- to post-program. Over 90% of participants reported that the was valuable, feasible, and usable. The most frequently discussed program strengths were the clear and comprehensive content, interactive and well-organized design, and relevance of curriculum content for future clinical practice. The overall weakness of the curriculum included the length, repetition of content, the lack of clarity and relevance of the assessment questions, end-user technology issues, and French translation discrepancies. Participant’s recommendations for improving the curriculum included streamlining content, addressing technology issues, and enhancing the clarity and relevance of assessment questions embedded within each of the modules. Conclusion Participants agreed that an online pain management and substance use curriculum is a valuable, usable, and feasible learning opportunity. Given the severity of the opioid crisis in Canada, these online modules provide a curriculum that can be integrated into existing UGME programs or can provide self-directed learning.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.081

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.280
GPT teacher head0.526
Teacher spread0.245 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch Square→Same topicInnovations in Medical Education→French-language works237,207→