MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389340661 · doi:10.1016/j.xfre.2023.11.010

Clinical embryology education programs must prepare graduates for the future

2023· editorial· en· W4389340661 on OpenAlexaffabout
Heather Shapiro, Danielle C. Bentley, G Hamilton, Pat Chronis-Brown, Avrum I. Gotlieb, Theodore J. Brown

Bibliographic record

VenueF&S Reports · 2023
Typeeditorial
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBiomedical Ethics and Regulation
Canadian institutionsLunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research InstituteSinai Health SystemUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedical educationWork (physics)MedicineEngineering ethicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We thank Racowsky (1Racowsky C. Training and recognition of clinical embryologists as professionals-now, but what does the future hold?.F S Rep. 2023; 4: 254-255Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (0) Google Scholar) for highlighting our recent article describing the development of a 2-year Masters of Health Sciences in Laboratory Medicine program at the University of Toronto directed at educating clinical embryologists and pathologists’ assistants (2Shapiro H. Brown T.J. Chronis-Brown P. Hamilton G.S. Bentley D.C. Kandel R. et al.Education of the clinical embryology laboratory professional: development of a novel program delivered in a laboratory medicine department.F S Rep. 2023; 4: 262-269Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (0) Google Scholar). We agree that Racowsky’s (1Racowsky C. Training and recognition of clinical embryologists as professionals-now, but what does the future hold?.F S Rep. 2023; 4: 254-255Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (0) Google Scholar) methods for training individuals to work as skilled clinical embryologists have lagged behind the tremendous advances in assisted reproductive technology (ART). We are proud to have developed a program aimed at filling this gap. We wish to comment on several of Racowsky’s (1Racowsky C. Training and recognition of clinical embryologists as professionals-now, but what does the future hold?.F S Rep. 2023; 4: 254-255Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (0) Google Scholar) points and provide additional insights, as appropriate. The professional graduate degree program we described was conceived, in part, from the belief that formal directed knowledge and skills acquisition through an accredited educational program should be required for clinical embryology because it is for every other health care profession. As Racowsky (1Racowsky C. Training and recognition of clinical embryologists as professionals-now, but what does the future hold?.F S Rep. 2023; 4: 254-255Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (0) Google Scholar) adroitly points out, fine motor skill is of paramount importance to a practicing clinical embryologist, and given the high complexity of a modern ART laboratory, sufficient experience cannot be fully provided within a 2-year educational program. She suggests that some in vitro fertilization (IVF) laboratory director colleagues may prefer the currently used apprenticeship model because this gives them the autonomy to train their own clinical embryologists to their specifications rather than hire those trained by others, supporting our thesis that there is insufficient quality control in the current model. The IVF laboratory directors who work with our graduates report that it is more efficient to train new hires who come with strong basic skills than to build skills from scratch. The hands-on training our students receive is purposefully progressive—beginning with simulation and then moving to a practical placement. During their time in our simulation skills development laboratory, students learn and practice foundational skills, from semen analysis and sperm assessment to blastocyst biopsy, embryo, and gamete cryopreservation, using human semen and rodent embryos as well as bovine ovaries and oocytes. Furthermore, we confirm that our students have mastered sufficiently these basic skills using standardized testing; therefore, we can assure future stakeholders of a high-level of competence among our graduates. After the demonstration of skill mastery, students begin a practical placement where they accumulate over 200 hours one-on-one with a preceptor in an IVF laboratory. In combination, both simulation and placement prepare our graduates to perfect their technical skills within their hiring laboratory, where they gain further refinement and experience, which are observed and documented in logbooks. These logs are often a requirement for full certification, which is independent of the university degree. Somewhat surprisingly, Racowsky (1Racowsky C. Training and recognition of clinical embryologists as professionals-now, but what does the future hold?.F S Rep. 2023; 4: 254-255Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (0) Google Scholar) questions the necessity of research exposure in the program. Some would say that one of the biggest threats to the credibility of ART providers is the indiscriminate adoption of unproven laboratory “add-ons” (3Lensen S. Hammarberg K. Polyakov A. Wilkinson J. Whyte S. Peate M. et al.How common is add-on use and how do patients decide whether to use them? A national survey of IVF patients.Hum Reprod. 2021; 36: 1854-1861Crossref PubMed Scopus (27) Google Scholar, 4Perrotta M. Hamper J. The crafting of hope: contextualising add-ons in the treatment trajectories of IVF patients.Soc Sci Med. 2021; 287114317Crossref PubMed Scopus (16) Google Scholar). We believe the best way to combat this threat is to ensure that our embryology colleagues are able to critically appraise innovation and that our research focus develops the skills needed for this evaluation. Racowksy (1Racowsky C. Training and recognition of clinical embryologists as professionals-now, but what does the future hold?.F S Rep. 2023; 4: 254-255Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (0) Google Scholar) also suggests that advances in robotics and artificial intelligence may obviate the need for clinical embryologists as we know them in the not-too-distant future. We agree that the role of the clinical embryologist will continue to evolve. We predict that advances may reduce the importance of fine motor hands-on skills and increase the demand for critical thinkers capable of applying sound research skills to solve complex problems within the overarching themes of ethics, medical advances, and gamete manipulation. We need to prepare for the embryologists of the future. Unquestionably, our graduate program curriculum cultivates skills conducive to leadership roles in the clinical embryology laboratory. As we move forward, the possibility of graded levels of clinical embryologist training, similar to the nursing profession, should be discussed, as pointed out by Racowsky (1Racowsky C. Training and recognition of clinical embryologists as professionals-now, but what does the future hold?.F S Rep. 2023; 4: 254-255Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (0) Google Scholar). Formalization of the required elements of these educational programs and oversight through accreditation will become of paramount importance to ensure that what constitutes the degree for the clinical embryology professional is defined. We look forward to future collaborations and continued discourse as an academic community working together to advance the field of clinical embryology. Heather Shapiro: Conceptualization, Writing – review & editing. Danielle C. Bentley: Conceptualization, Writing – review & editing. G.Scot Hamilton: Conceptualization, Writing – review & editing. Pat Chronis-Brown: Conceptualization, Writing – review & editing. Avrum I. Gotlieb: Conceptualization, Writing – review & editing. Theodore J. Brown: Conceptualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. H.S. has nothing to disclose. D.C.B. has nothing to disclose. G.S.H. has nothing to disclose. P.C.B. has nothing to disclose. A.I.G. has nothing to disclose. T.J.B. has nothing to disclose. Training and recognition of clinical embryologists as professionals—now, but what does the future hold?F&S ReportsVol. 4Issue 3PreviewI read with great interest the manuscript by Shapiro et al. (1) entitled “Education of the clinical embryology laboratory professional: development of a novel program delivered in a laboratory medicine department.” The investigators describe a 2-year master's program over 6 academic terms that they established recently at the University of Toronto in the Department of Clinical Medicine in collaboration with the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology. The curriculum for this program was developed with guidance from the Ontario Council of Academic Vice-Presidents that recognizes 5 categories of educational and academic quality: depth and breadth of knowledge; research and scholarship; application of knowledge; professional capacity; and communication skills. Full-Text PDF Open Access

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesResearch integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: Editorial
Teacher disagreement score0.156
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0030.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.415
Teacher spread0.377 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEditorial

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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueF&S ReportsSame topicBiomedical Ethics and RegulationFrench-language works237,207