MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4387083325 · doi:10.1097/01.eem.0000554863.46227.9a

Letter to the Editor

2019· letter· en· W4387083325 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff

Notice bibliographique

RevueEmergency Medicine News · 2019
Typeletter
Langueen
DomaineHealth Professions
ThématiqueVeterinary Practice and Education Studies
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésComputer science

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Editor: I think what Eric Blazar, MD, really means when he says we probably don't need more emergency physicians is that we probably don't need any more emergency physicians like him. (“Emergency Medicine Doesn't Need More Residencies,” EMN 2019;41[2]:6; http://bit.ly/2ViAA1y.) I mean this facetiously, of course. What I mean is he might be right that we don't need more EM residency graduates flooding the urban markets where they trained. But we sure need them in the rural areas. I went to med school and residency in metropolitan areas, but the minute I graduated, I was headed to practice in a rural region. Why? Because that's the kind of area where I was raised, and it's where I like to live. Perhaps Dr. Blazar is right that we don't need another resident from Manhattan staying on in the city to compete for the few hot jobs there and that will drive down the market. But in the region where I live, very few of our hospitals have EM-trained physicians. Some of them are staffed only by NPs and PAs with no physician on site. Maybe he would be fine being treated for a cardiac arrest by a new grad NP with no physician oversight, but I'd rather not. The problematic issue in his editorial is the assumption that it's fine for rural areas not to have qualified physicians. Rural people's lives are not worth less than those of urban people. We are not a bunch of ignorant hicks who should take whatever we can get. Yes, we in the boonies have been coping with shortages of emergency physicians (and all doctors really), but the answer isn't to say that this is a permanent problem; it's to try to fix it. Dr. Blazar's dismissive attitude that primary care physicians and nonphysician providers should be doing the EM care in rural areas is not right. These are the hospitals where you don't have specialist backup or quick transfers to major tertiary centers. These are the places where you want the most qualified doctors. Because we don't have a standardized pathway for family medicine doctors to train in EM after residency, unlike Canada, the most standardized way to have high-quality emergency care is to have board-certified EPs. How do you get them to rural areas? Diversity is a hot topic in medicine, but one area rarely discussed is diversity of background (not just race and gender). Most of the physicians working at my rural hospital grew up in rural areas. It's what they know, what they like, and the cost of living can't be beat. Because of the rural shortages of physicians in all specialties, medical schools should prioritize candidates from rural areas because they are the ones most likely to be comfortable moving there to practice. Requiring EM residencies to have a rural rotation is another potential solution because many physicians do become attracted to rural areas after experiencing the environment in person. We should also be supporting loan-forgiveness programs for physicians who move to rural areas. Dr. Blazar noted that training more EPs might result in “banishing [physicians]... to work in rural settings far from the urban cores.” It's really not so tragic out here. But we do struggle with physician shortages, so the way to improve the rural health crisis isn't to cut off the pipeline. It's to redirect it to the areas where shortages continue to exist. Viktoria Koskenoja, MD Marquette, MI

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 enseignants

Ni 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.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,003
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,034
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesCharge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Éditorial · Signal consensuel: Éditorial
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,949
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,171

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0030,034
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0020,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0020,001
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0030,001
Communication savante0,0050,005
Science ouverte0,0030,002
Intégrité de la recherche0,0160,014
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0510,042

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.

Tête enseignante Opus0,287
Tête enseignante GPT0,510
Écart entre enseignants0,223 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_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 découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreÉditorial

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2019
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueEmergency Medicine NewsMême sujetVeterinary Practice and Education StudiesTravaux en français237 207