Bibliographic record
Abstract
This issue of Education for Health (EfH) includes articles in the form of Original Research, General Articles, Brief Communications, Student Contributions, and Letters to Editors. There are contributions from multiple countries, including South Africa, Nigeria, Botswana, Canada, India, Lebanon, the United Kingdom, and the United States, as well as a collaboration between authors in Laos and the United States. The articles address several aspects of health professions education, including medical school access, social accountability, and preparation for career transitions. These articles provide views of some of the lessons learned about the potential for changes to health professions education due to the COVID-19 pandemic. We open with a tribute to a past editor, long-time reviewer, editorial board member, and supporter of EfH, Hilliard “Hill” Jason. Hill has greatly contributed to setting the standards for our journal. While we appreciate all of our reviewers, a special thank you is extended to Hill in this tribute. Prudent prescribing is a global concern and identifying curricular gaps regarding this type of training is important. Bashar et al. are to be commended for examining this topic. Antibiotic stewardship is poorly discussed in most of the undergraduate curriculum. They compared curricula in South Africa and Nigeria. While there were differences in curricular style, gaps were identified in both curricula. Their article should provide additional insights to curriculum developers. Doctor–patient relationships are correlated with increased compliance and better patient outcomes. While it is well known that a positive relationship with health-care providers has many benefits, studying the perspective of the patient can guide the improvement of training and practice. Research conducted by Sepako and Molwantwa from Botswana used a critical incident approach to ask patients to provide their views of desirable characteristics in a doctor. Not surprisingly, the themes identified align with qualities encouraged in the development of communication skills. Specific information is provided regarding these skills, with the recommendation that experiential opportunities be provided to students. In their manuscript titled “Academic Clinician Educators: Confronting the Challenges to Successful Retirement,” Greenberg et al. present useful information that is relevant not just to retirees but to the institutions and professional organizations that could support staff through the planning, transitional, and retirement phases of professional life. The topic is particularly propitious in this COVID era when the rate of retirement far exceeds the rate of replacement. At a time when more emphasis is placed on work/life balance and workforce demands in primary care continue, this article provides research and viewpoints that can be a framework for retirement planning for all physicians. Changes to curriculum delivery during the initial COVID-19 lockdown led to additional studies of factors that might improve training. In their article, “The Interprofessional Education of Medical Students and Physician Associate Students during COVID-19,” Palmer et al. present an approach to case-based, online training with medical students, physician associates (physician assistants in the US), and general practitioner instructors. To facilitate training when they could not be in their in-person setting, a course was designed to focus on emergency medicine topics. While the results showed improved confidence and perceived knowledge for the trainees, the most important finding was the increase in the understanding and appreciation of their roles in providing care. International migration includes the movement of patients globally. Market et al. report on medical students’ knowledge of female genital mutilation and associated clinical behaviors. The cultural nature of the practice and health professionals lack of training could create challenges and barriers in the provision of care. The authors found that training was needed for both students and practicing professionals. The nature of this issue made it difficult for trainees to identify those at risk and to meet their needs. Their findings will guide programs for trainees and staff. Letters to the Editor are from collaborators in Laos and the United States, and the United States. They provide information on the nature of international, online collaboration among students sharing medical education resources and the training needs of postgraduate students in different specialties to reduce burnout. These articles, collectively, meet the goals of EfH in the dissemination of work about health professions education that leads to improved health and health-care delivery. Financial support and sponsorship Nil. Conflicts of interest There are no conflicts of 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 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 0.010 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".