Progress made on access to rural health care in Canada
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
OBJECTIVE: To describe the progress of the Rural Road Map Implementation Committee (RRMIC) on implementing the Rural Road Map for Action (RRM). COMPOSITION OF THE COMMITTEE: The RRMIC is co-sponsored by the College of Family Physicians of Canada and the Society of Rural Physicians of Canada and has a broad membership that deliberately crosses sectors supporting the RRM’s social accountability vision. Committee members are either decision makers or maintain influential positions as part of the organizations they represent and are chosen based on their knowledge of and influence to advance the RRM. METHODS: The RRMIC was formed in February 2018 to support the implementation of the RRM. The RRMIC is designed to provide a forum whereby member organizations can report and deliberate on how to further advance the RRM in ways that can be scaled and spread locally, provincially, and at a pan-Canadian level. REPORT: Canadians living in rural communities continue to experience challenges in accessing rural health care. Rural communities have difficulty attracting and retaining family physicians, as policy interventions focus on the short term rather than the long term. Policy decisions are often guided by urban health care models without understanding the potential negative effects in rural communities. Rural communities need rural-based solutions and to develop a regional capacity to innovate, experiment, and discover what works. In response to these challenges, the RRM was developed in February 2017. The RRM is a series of recommendations for a renewed pan-Canadian approach to rural physician work force planning and provides a pathway forward, developing a comprehensive rural health framework to improve access to safe, high-quality health care for rural Canadians close to home. While considerable progress has been made by the RRMIC on key priority actions from the RRM, much work still needs to be done through collective and collaborative efforts as well as partnerships among stakeholders such as leaders, health care providers, administrators of health care institutions, and those who work and live among and provide care for rural populations, as well as rural communities themselves. Collaborative partnerships and commitments from all key stakeholders will be critical to addressing national and regional health work force needs in order to ensure equitable access to health care for rural Canada.
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 distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 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 tête enseignante, 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 ».