Classroom-Based Learning in an Academic Obstetrics and Gynecology Residency Training Program
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: Classroom-based learning such as academic half days (AHDs) are complementary to workplace learning in postgraduate medical education. This study examined three research questions: the purpose of AHDs, elements of an effective AHD, and factors that make AHD sustainable. Methods: = 7) and the program administrator was interviewed in 2018. The themes in each research question were identified by modified inductive analysis. Results: Residents expressed that the purposes of AHD included: providing organization and an overview for their knowledge acquisition; preparation for their Royal College specialty exam; and to provide a venue for peer support and mentorship. Elements of an effective AHD include the repetition of key concepts; formative assessments such as quizzes, a suitable balance of faculty input and resident active participation, and protection from clinical duty during AHD. Regarding the sustainability of AHD, themes included: addressing barriers to faculty participation, providing administrative support for logistical needs, and providing feedback to faculty. Conclusions: This work provides important insights into the purpose, effectiveness, and sustainability of AHDs for those who design and implement classroom learning for residents.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".