Describing the Experiences of Canadian Genetic Counseling Students Studying in the United States
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There are fewer and smaller genetic counseling master’s programs in Canada compared to the United States, which makes it challenging for prospective Canadian students to train in their home country. We investigated which factors influenced Canadian students to apply or not to apply to American genetic counseling training programs, as well as the experiences of those Canadians who attended a program in the United States. We predicted that Canadian students applied to American genetic counseling training programs primarily because of limited training opportunities in Canada and a competitive application process across North America. We used a mixed method, online survey to study Canadian genetic counseling students who matched with a training program during the 2018-2021 application cycles. Descriptive statistics and thematic analysis were used to analyze the collected data. We had a total of 72 respondents, most of whom identified as female, white, and not Hispanic or Latino, and a response rate of 48.6%. Limited training opportunities in Canada and a competitive application process were the most common factors that influenced Canadian students to apply to American programs. Cost of education in the United States and cost and logistics of the GRE requirement for American programs were the most common factors that influenced Canadians not to apply to an American program. Canadian genetic counseling students who studied in the United States faced challenges related to being an international student and stated that more information, contact with other Canadians, and personal support from the program and/or institution would have improved their experience. We propose the development of informational materials and a support network of Canadian genetic counseling students that can be advertised in a joint effort by NSGC and AGCPD. To our knowledge, this is the first study to investigate the experiences of Canadian genetic counseling students and our findings highlight the unique challenges faced by this group.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.021 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 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".