Early relational health training in Canadian paediatric residency programs: A national program director survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: Early Relational Health (ERH)-a foundational determinant of lifelong mental and physical health-is emerging as a critical component of paediatric practice. However, its integration into Canadian paediatric residency training remains poorly defined. This study conducted an environmental scan of Canadian paediatric residency programs to examine the current state of ERH education, as reported by Program Directors (PDs). Methods: PDs from Canadian paediatric residency programs were invited to complete an anonymous survey (September-December 2023). The survey explored PDs' definitions of ERH, existing training opportunities, perceptions of how well ERH is addressed, and motivators for incorporating structured curricula. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Results: Ten PDs completed the survey (37% response rate). All (100%) General Pediatrics PDs reported their program teaches positive parenting and early child development "Not Very Well," compared with 20% of subspecialty PDs. Sixty per cent of General Pediatrics PDs and all Subspecialty PDs rated an ERH curriculum as "Very Important" for their learners. Nearly all respondents expressed interest in implementing a structured, evidence-based, self-guided ERH curriculum to improve resident knowledge and skills. Discussion: This is the first study to evaluate ERH training within Canadian paediatric residency programs. While some subspecialty programs have integrated ERH content, most General Pediatrics programs identified clear training gaps. All PDs recognized ERH as an essential topic despite limited formal education opportunities. Development of a structured, competency-based ERH curriculum represents a key next step in advancing paediatric training and care quality in Canada.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".