MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401333526 · doi:10.1186/s12245-024-00671-9

IFEM model curriculum: emergency medicine learning outcomes for undergraduate medical education

2024· article· en· W4401333526 on OpenAlexaff
Arif Alper Çevik, Elif Dilek Cakal, James Kwan, Simon N. Chu, Sithembile Mtombeni, V. Anantharaman, Nicholas Jourıles, David Peng, Andrew C. Singer, Peter Cameron, James Ducharme, Abraham Ka Chung Wai, David E. Manthey, Cherri Hobgood, Terrence Mullıgan, Edgardo Menendez, Juliusz Jakubaszko, Abdullah Abdulkhaliq Qazzaz, Aisha Hamed Al Khamisi, Amal Al-Mandhari, Amber Marie Hathcock, Aus N. Jamil, Borwon Wittayachamanakul, Bret A. Nicks, Carlos E. Vallejo-Bocanumen, Cem Oktay, Chih‐Hsien Chi, Conor Deasy, Craig Beringer, Doris Uwamahoro, Dorota Rutkowska, Erin L. Simon, Faith Joan Gaerlan, Frida Meyer, Immad S. Qureshi, Janet Lin, Jesús Daniel López Tapia, J. A. Kaplan, Keamogetswe Molokoane, Kuldeep Kaur, Lars P. Bjoernsen, Lisa Kurland, Matthew Chu, Miklos Szedlak, Mohamed Alwi Abdul Rahman, Mohan Kamalanathan, Vincent Ndebwanimana, Oscar Navea, Pariwat Phungoen, Pauline Convocar, Péter Vass, Philipp Martin, Rahim Valani, RAFAEL VITÓRIO DOS SANTOS, Ruth Hew Li-Shan, Sabrina Berdouk, Saleem Varachhia, Sam Thenabadu, Sameer Thapa, Sean M Kivlehan, Sofía Basauri, Syed Ghazanfar Saleem, Valerie F. Krym, Victor Lee, Wee Choon Peng Jeremy, Zsolt Kozma

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Emergency Medicine · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInnovations in Medical Education
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCurriculumDelphi methodContext (archaeology)MedicineMedical educationSports medicineFamily medicinePsychologyPhysical therapyComputer sciencePedagogyArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The International Federation for Emergency Medicine (IFEM) published its model curriculum for medical student education in emergency medicine in 2009. Because of the evolving principles of emergency medicine and medical education, driven by societal, professional, and educational developments, there was a need for an update on IFEM recommendations. The main objective of the update process was creating Intended Learning Outcomes (ILOs) and providing tier-based recommendations. METHOD: A consensus methodology combining nominal group and modified Delphi methods was used. The nominal group had 15 members representing eight countries in six regions. The process began with a review of the 2009 curriculum by IFEM Core Curriculum and Education Committee (CCEC) members, followed by a three-phase update process involving survey creation [The final survey document included 55 items in 4 sections, namely, participant & context information (16 items), intended learning outcomes (6 items), principles unique to emergency medicine (20 items), and content unique to emergency medicine (13 items)], participant selection from IFEM member countries and survey implementation, and data analysis to create the recommendations. RESULTS: Out of 112 invitees (CCEC members and IFEM member country nominees), 57 (50.9%) participants from 27 countries participated. Eighteen (31.6%) participants were from LMICs, while 39 (68.4%) were from HICs. Forty-four (77.2%) participants have been involved with medical students' emergency medicine training for more than five years in their careers, and 56 (98.2%) have been involved with medical students' training in the last five years. Thirty-five (61.4%) participants have completed a form of training in medical education. The exercise resulted in the formulation of tiered ILO recommendations. Tier 1 ILOs are recommended for all medical schools, Tier 2 ILOs are recommended for medical schools based on perceived local healthcare system needs and/or adequate resources, and Tier 3 ILOs should be considered for medical schools based on perceived local healthcare system needs and/or adequate resources. CONCLUSION: The updated IFEM ILO recommendations are designed to be applicable across diverse educational and healthcare settings. These recommendations aim to provide a clear framework for medical schools to prepare graduates with essential emergency care capabilities immediately after completing medical school. The successful distribution and implementation of these recommendations hinge on support from faculty and administrators, ensuring that future healthcare professionals are well-prepared for emergency medical care.

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)0.042
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.065
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.223

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0420.065
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.460
Teacher spread0.410 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Emergency MedicineSame topicInnovations in Medical EducationFrench-language works237,207