Alcohol, Isolation, and Access to Treatment: Family Physician Experiences of Alcohol Consumption and Access to Health Care in Rural British Columbia
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this project was to study the experiences of physicians who treat persons with alcohol-attributed diseases in rural areas of British Columbia, Canada. METHOD: A cross-sectional survey was distributed to primary health care physicians that had a family practice in a designated rural community using the Rural Coordination Centre of British Columbia's community isolation rating system. Data were collected through a mail and online survey sent to primary health care physicians. Purposeful sampling was used to select participants that had a primary health care practice in a designated rural community. RESULTS: Surveys were returned by 22% of potential participants (N = 67) that had an average of 15.8 years in family practice. The majority of participants (95.4%) reported that alcohol had a negative impact on population health, and physicians expressed particular concern for alcohol consumption in relation to mental health (85.1%) and physical illness (82.1%). Most participants had referred patients out of the community for treatment; however, 76.4% reported difficulty with referrals, including long wait-lists, limited services, and issues related to transportation and leaving the community for substance use treatment. CONCLUSION: Rural physicians showed an awareness and concern for alcohol consumption in their community, but they also reported difficulties referring patients for substance use treatment. Additional study is required to understand how to improve the continuity of care provided to persons with alcohol-related issues in rural British Columbia.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it