Perceptions of an Inter-Residency Narrative Medicine Curriculum
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Background Narrative medicine (NM) is a discipline that equips clinicians with essential skills such as close reading, observation, and reflective practice, enabling them to listen more attentively and gain a deeper understanding of health care. Despite these advantages, many training programs lack skilled facilitators to implement NM locally. To address this gap, a hybrid virtual/in-person inter-residency NM curriculum was developed. Objective This study aims to explore residents’ perceptions of the NM curriculum and how they describe its influence on their personal or professional development. Methods We conducted 2 focus group interviews of pediatrics residents who attended at least one NM workshop. The 50-minute workshops occurred monthly from July 2023 to July 2024 as part of the mandatory pediatrics residency conference curriculum, though attendance was secondary to clinical duties. Attendance included 10 to 15 residents and 1 to 2 fellow or faculty facilitators. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and thematically analyzed. Results Through analysis of 2 focus groups comprising 13 total residents, we identified 3 themes: reconnecting with humanity through reflection, strengthening relationships with colleagues and patients, and appreciating institutional support for NM. Conclusions Our study demonstrates that an inter-residency NM curriculum fostered a sense of community by enabling residents to reflect on their clinical practice and connect with colleagues within and beyond their respective campuses. Residents valued the opportunity to learn from peers and supervisors alike and appreciated program leadership’s support of NM.
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 | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".