Canadian Pediatric Gastroenterology Workforce: Current Status, Concerns and Future Projections
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There is concern that the Canadian pediatric gastroenterology workforce is inadequate to meet health care demands of the pediatric population. The Canadian Association of Gastroenterology Pediatric Committee performed a survey to determine characteristics and future plans of the Canadian pediatric gastroenterology workforce and trainees. METHODS: Estimates of total and pediatric populations were obtained from the 2001 Census of Population, Statistics Canada (with estimates to July 1, 2005). Data on Canadian pediatric gastroenterologists, including clinical full-time equivalents, sex, work interests, opinions on workforce adequacy, retirement plans, fellowship training programs and future employment plans of fellows, were gathered through e-mail surveys and telephone correspondence in 2005 and 2006. RESULTS: Canada had an estimated population of 32,270,507 in 2005 (6,967,853 people aged zero to 17 years). The pediatric gastroenterology workforce was estimated at 9.2 specialists per million children. Women accounted for 50% of the workforce. Physician to pediatric population ratios varied, with Alberta demonstrating the highest and Saskatchewan the lowest ratios (1:69,404 versus 1:240,950, respectively). Between 1998 and 2005, Canadian pediatric gastroenterology fellowship programs trained 65 fellows (65% international trainees). Twenty-two fellows (34%) entered the Canadian workforce. CONCLUSIONS: The survey highlights the variable and overall low numbers of pediatric gastroenterologists across Canada, an increasingly female workforce, a greater percentage of part-time physicians and a small cohort of Canadian trainees. In conjunction with high projected retirement rates, greater demands on the workforce and desires to partake in nonclinical activities, there is concern for an increasing shortage of pediatric gastroenterologists in Canada in future years.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
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".