Bibliographic record
Abstract
What is being billed as the most comprehensive survey of family doctors ever conducted in Canada reveals a physician workforce that is stretched to the limit, if not beyond. Results from the 2001 National Family Physician Workforce Survey, conducted this spring by the College of Family Physicians of Canada (CFPC), were released Oct. 25 during the college's annual meeting in Vancouver. At a well-attended news conference, CFPC leaders stressed the main points of the mail-in poll, which was sent to all family doctors in Canada and attracted 14 319 responses (51.2%). The survey reveals that: · family physicians see an average of 124 patients a week during regularly scheduled clinical activity; · family physicians spend an average of 53 hours a week on professional activities, not including on-call time; · almost three-quarters provide some type of on-call services; · only 30.2% are accepting new patients without restrictions; · 67% report that there are moderate to severe problems accessing medical care in their communities, up 15% from a similar survey done in 1997; · one-third have reduced their scope of practice in the past 2 years or plan to do so in the next 2 years. Dr. Cal Gutkin, the college's executive director, said the survey findings show that the situation “has gone from bad to worse” for both family doctors and the health care system in general. “The bottom line is there are not enough family physicians to meet patient needs,” said CFPC President Donald Gelhorn, a family physician in Hudson Bay, Sask. The incoming president, Dr. Dominique Tessier of Montreal, estimated that an additional 3000 family physicians are needed to meet current needs and that unless the shortfall is addressed this number will double over the next 10 years. In an interview, Dr. Nick Busing, chair of the survey steering committee, said he was not surprised by the findings. “None of the areas we are concerned about are getting any better,” he said, referring specifically to the increase in the number of family doctors expressing concern about patient access to appropriate services and to the increasing number of hours family doctors are working.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.057 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.283 | 0.312 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".