MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388819797 · doi:10.22454/fammed.2023.477983

Primary Care Perspectives on Education Scholarship: A Qualitative Synthesis

2023· article· en· W4388819797 on OpenAlexafffund
Laura Liu, Betty Chen, Joyce Nyhof‐Young

Bibliographic record

VenueFamily Medicine · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInnovations in Medical Education
Canadian institutionsWomen's College HospitalUniversity of Toronto
FundersIran Nanotechnology Initiative CouncilUniversity of TorontoWomen's College Hospital
KeywordsScholarshipMentorshipMedical educationQualitative researchMEDLINEPsychologyMedicineSociologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: A significant portion of medical education takes place in primary care settings with family medicine clinician teachers that have variable backgrounds in teaching. Ernest Boyer's concept of education scholarship calls on faculty to systematically study and innovate their teaching practices. This meta-ethnographic review synthesizes the literature on primary care clinician teachers' perspectives and experiences of integrating education scholarship in practice. METHODS: We conducted an electronic database search in PubMed/Medline, Scopus, ERIC, and Web of Science for primary research articles published between January 2000 and August 2021. In the included articles, researchers studied primary care physicians' and/or residents' perspectives of clinical teaching and reported qualitative results (eg, interviews, focus groups). Of the 1,454 articles found in the search, we included 33 in the final synthesis. We used line-by-line descriptive coding of the qualitative data to develop analytical themes. RESULTS: Four main themes emerged from our synthesis: (1) perceptions of clinical teaching (lack of confidence, presumed teaching competency, lack of formal recognition); (2) clinical teaching strategies (learner-centered teaching, ad hoc teaching, role modeling, mentorship); (3) benefits of clinical teaching (shared learning experience, networking, personal interest, career satisfaction); and (4) challenges of clinical teaching (inadequate time, compensation, conflicting responsibilities). CONCLUSIONS: Clinician teachers identified several common factors regarding their scholarly roles but had difficulty describing them in relation to education scholarship. Institutional support, resources, and awareness are needed to assist family medicine clinician teachers to further implement Boyer's concept of education scholarship in practice-specifically, to study, evaluate, and innovate current clinical teaching strategies.

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)0.058
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.069
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.942
Threshold uncertainty score0.306

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0580.069
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0100.015
Science and technology studies0.0080.006
Scholarly communication0.0070.006
Open science0.0020.008
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.435
Teacher spread0.366 · 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.

Study designQualitative
DomainMethods
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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFamily MedicineSame topicInnovations in Medical EducationFrench-language works237,207