Rural-urban and gender differences in procedures performed by family practice residency graduates.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: We compared the types of procedures performed and obstetrical care provided by family practice residency graduates, by practice location and physician gender METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional questionnaire survey of 702 graduates who completed family practice residency programs in Alberta, Canada, from 1985 to 1995, inclusive. Graduates were asked to indicate which of 28 procedures and 7 obstetrical care practices they performed. The data were analyzed by gender and current practice location. RESULTS: A total of 442 (63%) of the graduates responded to the survey. The top five procedures performed by family practice graduates were minor office surgery, foreign body removal (eye), joint aspiration, joint injection, and anterior nasal packing. There was a declining trend in the number of procedures performed by family practice graduates from rural, to regional, to metropolitan areas. Relatively more males performed procedures; however, more females did IUD insertion and obstetrical care practice. Except for a few exceptions, a similar proportion of male and female graduates in rural practice performed procedures. CONCLUSIONS: The procedural and obstetrical care pattern of practice differs between family practice graduates in rural and urban areas, as well as between male andfemale graduates. Family practice residency programs should consider additional training in procedural skills for those planning to practice in rural areas, as well as encourage females to become skilled at performing procedures relevant to family practice.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".