MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408682085 · doi:10.1177/26323524251326949

A mixed methods pilot study of a serious illness communication training curriculum among medical residents

2025· article· en· W4408682085 on OpenAlexaff
Megan Smith-Uffen, Shilpa Jyothi Kumar, Oren Levine, Daryl Bainbridge, Jeff Myers, Leah Steinberg, Nadia Incardona, Maggie Civak, Hsien Seow

Bibliographic record

VenuePalliative Care and Social Practice · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPatient-Provider Communication in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCurriculumSummative assessmentMedicineMedical educationFocus groupQuality of life (healthcare)Self-efficacyFamily medicinePsychologyNursingFormative assessmentPedagogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: It is crucial that clinicians develop skillful communication to support patients to improve their illness understanding. A strong understanding of illness is associated with improved quality of life and care that is consistent with patient priorities. Unfortunately, many clinicians lack these skills, and residents, in particular, feel unprepared. The ABCs (All Providers, Better Communication Skills) is a virtual curriculum that teaches core communication skills to facilitate conversations with people who are living with serious illnesses. Objectives: We explored whether the ABCs curriculum increases self-efficacy and addresses self-reported weaknesses in communication training for internal medicine (IM) and family medicine (FM) residents. Design: We conducted a prospective sequential mixed methods cohort study. Methods: Residents completed pre-/post-curriculum self-assessment surveys and a post-curriculum semi-structured interview. Primary outcomes were changes in self-efficacy, whether the curriculum addressed self-identified training needs and feedback on its structure and delivery. Secondary outcomes included feedback on how the modules could be tailored to IM and FM-specific content. Results: Twelve residents completed the study. Most were in IM, female, and aged 26–30 years. Self-efficacy improved significantly as per the SE-12 summative score (mean difference 11.5 points (SD 10.35), p = 0.003). The study-created items showed a significant improvement in breaking bad news (0.83 (SD 0.84), p = 0.005), overall knowledge (0.67 (SD 0.65), p = 0.005), and confidence (0.67 (SD 0.50), p = 0.001). Key strengths of the curriculum were its structured approach, focus on allowing for silence, transferrable skills, and practical application. The virtual format was both a strength and a weakness, as residents appreciated its accessibility but valued real-time practice. Conclusion: The ABCs improved self-efficacy among IM and FM residents. We will use results from this study to inform future iterations of the platform that are tailored to resident-specific learning needs and improving patient-centered outcomes.

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)0.014
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.070
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.303
GPT teacher head0.553
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 designQualitative
Domainnot available
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

Citations5
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePalliative Care and Social PracticeSame topicPatient-Provider Communication in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207