1132 The Best Way to Develop a Surgeon: An International Comparison of Medical Education and Surgical Training
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Aim Currently, interest in surgical careers is declining globally. Surgeons share ideas internationally without sharing much about training. This study compares international pathways toward surgeon development with the aim of seeking improvements. Method A 70-question anonymous survey was distributed internationally to surgeons of all specialties. Data were analysed in SPSS Statistics for Macintosh (IBM). A value of p<0.05 indicates statistical significance. Results The 463 respondents from the U.S. (59%); U.K. (16%); Europe (10%); Canada (5%), and the Rest of the World (RotW)(10%) averaged age 46; 64% were female. Non-U.S./Canadians (93%) attended 5- and 6-year medical schools; U.S. respondents were far more likely (91%) to attend non-medical 4+-year university before medical school. Weekly training-hour weekly mandates spanned <48 (9%) to 80+ (45%); 76% surpassed mandate hours; 9% reported accurate hours. Average educational debt ranged from $14,000 (Europe) to $179,000 (U.S.). Few (19%) felt training allowed family building. Nearly all U.S./Canadians felt competent after training, versus U.K. (81%), RotW (74%) and Europe (70%). Conclusions The outlook of surgery as an attractive career depends on the way we develop future surgeons. Based on best practices from different countries, the authors recommend a 6-year maximum university/medical education requirement; elimination of mandatory non-surgical training years; single-program surgical training; 60-hour work-weeks; competency-based training; AI tools for training and tasks; advanced-care providers for non-educational tasks; certifying at completing of training; and support of childbearing and childcare.
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 | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".