ICES Report: Primary Care Visits: How Many Doctors Do People See?
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The essence of primary care reform is the creation of a formal relationship between a physician provider and a patient.The idea is that a patient will sign on with a particular provider who will then take medical responsibility for accessibility, quality of care and continuity of care.However, various aspects of physician remuneration, specifically negation, are perceived as a disincentive for physicians.Negation refers to the deduction of a specified amount from the contracted physician if a patient sees another family physician or general practitioner not associated with their practice.How often and to what extent patients see different family physicians or general practitioners (FPs/GPs) becomes an important question in the debate.Scientists at ICES are examining several aspects of family medicine and general practice, including the use of physician claims from the Ontario Health Insurance Plan (OHIP), to learn how often patients see different primary care physicians.In one study, a random sample of 538 primary care physicians, having more than 500 OHIP claims in fiscal 1997/98, was examined.Only office-based visits were included in the study.This group of physicians saw 738,910 patients over 6,493,345 visits.In one year, about 31.0% of patients saw one FP/GP, 29.8% saw two FPs/GPs, 18.3% saw three, 10.0% saw four and 10.9% saw five or more FPs/GPs.When specialist consultation visits were included, the proportion of patients seeing only one physician dropped to 17.7% while the proportion of patients visiting more than five physicians a year grew to 26.0%.Using OHIP consultation data, patients were "assigned" to various FP/GP practices using different assignment rules.For the "75% Rule," a patient was assigned to a primary care physician if at least 75% of his or her visits were to this primary care physician.The "Majority Rule" assigned a patient to a primary care physician if at least 50% of visits were to this primary care physician.The "Plurality Rule" assigned the patient to the primary care physician who accounted for the highest proportion of total visits made by the patient.In Table 1, the Majority Rule and Plurality Rule assigned the most patients to the randomly selected FP/GP physician (53.3% and 56.7% respectively), with the plurality rule also assigning more patients to other FPs/GPs (29.2%).The 75% Rule had the most
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 | 0,005 | 0,016 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,003 | 0,006 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,003 | 0,003 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,005 | 0,002 |
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 ».