Physician teacher perceptions of undergraduate medical students' four week integrated community experience / by Marsha Ann Reinikka.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to examine the perceptions of Northern Ontario physician-teachers with regard to second-year medical students who participated in a Northern Ontario Medicine (NOSM) four-week integrated community experience. A questionnaire, with follow-up interviews, was given to the physician-teachers to determine their perception of the impact of the NOSM students on the physician-teacher's medical practice, the participation of the students in the community, and the student performance on selected areas of the curriculum. Physician-teachers reported that the students had a small negative impact on the productivity of their practice and a positive impact on the professional aspects of their practice. The physician-teachers perceived that the second-year NOSM students participated in the community as much or more than third- and fourth-year elective students from other medical schools. The physician-teachers reported that the performance of the NOSM second-year students on selected areas of the curriculum was as good, if not better, than third- and fourth-year students on elective placements from other medical schools. Implications of results are discussed in reference to the key stakeholders.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".