Relationship between practice location of Ontario family physicians and their rural background or amount of rural medical education experience.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
INTRODUCTION: The present study was designed to determine if there was a difference in rural background and rural medical education experience between practising rural physicians and practising urban physicians in Ontario. METHOD: A cross-sectional survey was mailed to 507 strictly defined rural family physicians and 505 urban family physicians practising in Ontario. The main outcome measures were population of the community while growing up, rural medical education and medical school attended. RESULTS: Responses of 264 rural physicians were compared with 179 urban physician responses. The groups were comparable in years of practice. Rural physicians were significantly more likely to have grown up in a rural community (34.9% v. 14.6%), to have had clinical training in a rural setting during medical school (55.4% v. 35.2%) and to have had clinical training in a rural setting of 8 weeks or more during postgraduate residency training (38.8% v. 20.2%). During residency training, longer duration of rural placements (more than 6 months) was significantly associated with practice in a rural area (15.5% of rural physicians, 1.7% of urban physicians). After controlling for other predictors, each of the following were independent variables: growing up in a community of less than 10 000 people (odds ratio [OR] 3.31), having had some undergraduate rural clinical training (OR 2.46), having had postgraduate rural training of 8 weeks or more (OR 2.17), attending a Canadian medical school outside Ontario (OR 3.80) and being male (OR 2.57). CONCLUSION: Practising rural physicians compared with urban physicians were significantly more likely to have come from a rural background, to have had an undergraduate rural medical education, to have had postgraduate rural training, to have graduated from a Canadian medical school outside Ontario, and to be male. Each of these had an independent effect on practice location.
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 | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| 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 ».