MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404925337 · doi:10.2196/60940

Impact of Ophthalmic Knowledge Assessment Program Scores and Surgical Volume on Subspecialty Fellowship Application in Ophthalmology Residency: Retrospective Cohort Study

2024· article· en· W4404925337 on OpenAlex
Amanda K Hertel, Radwan Ajlan

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Medical Education · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOphthalmology and Visual Health Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSubspecialtyResidency trainingGraduation (instrument)OphthalmologyRetrospective cohort studyGlaucomaFamily medicineGraduate medical educationAccreditationSurgeryMedical educationContinuing education

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Ophthalmology residents take the Ophthalmic Knowledge Assessment Program (OKAP) exam annually, which provides percentile rank for multiple categories and the total score. In addition, ophthalmology residency training programs have multiple subspecialty rotations with defined minimum procedure requirements. However, residents' surgical volumes vary, with some residents exceeding their peers in specific subspecialty rotations. Objective: This study aims to identify if there is a difference in OKAP examination scores and surgical volume exposure during ophthalmology residency training between nonfellowship and fellowship applicants and among various subspecialties. Methods: A retrospective review of OKAP scores and surgical procedure numbers of graduating residents in an accredited academic ophthalmology residency program in the Midwest United States was conducted. Data were collected from 2012 to 2022. Results: A total of 31 residents were identified. Most residents decided to pursue fellowship training upon graduation (20/31, 65% residents), and the rest chose to practice comprehensive ophthalmology (11/31, 35% residents). A total of 18/31 residents had OKAP score reports available. The fellowship group outperformed the nonfellowship group in multiple subsections and the total exam (P=.04). Those pursuing fellowship training in glaucoma performed higher on the Glaucoma section (P=.004) and the total exam (P=.005). Residents pursuing cornea performed higher on nearly all subsections, including External Disease and Cornea (P=.02) and the total exam (P=.007). The majority of the surgical volume exposure was identical between fellowship and nonfellowship groups. Those who pursued glaucoma fellowship performed more glaucoma filtering and shunting procedures (P=.03). Residents going into pediatrics fellowship were primary surgeons in more strabismus cases (P=.01), assisted in fewer strabismus cases (P<.001), and had no difference in the total number of strabismus surgeries. Conclusions: In our program, residents pursuing fellowship training had higher OKAP scores on multiple sections and the total exam. There was no significant difference in the overall surgical volume averages between fellowship and nonfellowship groups, but few differences existed in subspecialty procedures among fellowship applicants. Larger multicenter studies are needed to clarify the relationship between OKAP scores and ophthalmology fellowship decisions nationwide.

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.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.566
Teacher spread0.511 · 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