The characteristics of physicians disciplined by professional colleges in Canada.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: The identification of health care professionals who are incompetent, impaired, uncaring or have criminal intent has received increasing attention in recent years. These individuals are often subject to disciplinary action by professional licensing authorities. To date, no national data exist for Canadian physicians disciplined for professional misconduct. We sought to describe the characteristics of physicians disciplined by Canadian professional licensing authorities. METHODS: We constructed a database of physicians disciplined by provincial licensing authorities during the years 2000 to 2009. Comparisons were made with the general population of physicians licensed in Canada. Data on demographic characteristics, type of misconduct and penalty imposed were collected for each disciplined physician. RESULTS: A total of 606 identifiable physicians were disciplined by their professional college during the years 2000 to 2009. The proportion of licensed physicians who were disciplined in a given year ranged from 0.06% to 0.11%. Fifty-one of the disciplined physicians committed 64 repeat offences, accounting for a total of 113 (19%) offences. Most of the disciplined physicians were independent practitioners (99%), male (92%) and trained in Canada (67%). The most common specialties of physicians subject to disciplinary action were family medicine (62%), psychiatry (14%) and surgery (9%). For disciplined physicians, the average number of years from medical school graduation to disciplinary action was 28.9 (standard deviation [SD] = 11.3). The 3 most frequent violations were sexual misconduct (20%), failure to meet a standard of care (19%) and unprofessional conduct (16%). The 3 most frequently imposed penalties were fines (27%), suspensions (19%) and formal reprimands (18%). INTERPRETATION: A small proportion of registered physicians in Canada were disciplined by their medical licensing authorities. Sexual misconduct was the most common disciplined offence. The standardization of provincial reporting along with the creation of a national database of physician offenders would facilitate more comparable public reporting as well as further research and educational initiatives.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,005 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,004 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».