Knowledge, attitudes and behaviours associated with the provision of hepatitis C care by Canadian family physicians
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The role of primary care physicians in providing care for hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is increasingly emphasized, but many gaps and challenges remain. This study explores family physicians' knowledge, attitudes and practices associated with providing care for HCV infection. Seven hundred and forty-nine members of the College of Family Physicians of Canada (CFPC) completed a self-administered survey examining knowledge, attitudes and behaviours regarding HCV infection screening and care. Multivariate analyses were performed using the outcome, HCV care provision, and variables based on a conceptual model of practice guideline adherence. Family physicians providing basic-advanced HCV care were more likely to be older, practice in a rural setting, have injection drug users (IDU) in their practice and have higher levels of knowledge about the initial assessment (OR = 1.77; 95% CI = 1.23-2.54) and treatment of HCV (OR = 1.74; 95% CI = 1.24-2.43). They were also less likely to believe that family physicians do not have a role in HCV care (OR = 0.41; 95% CI = 0.30-0.58). Educational programmes should target physicians less likely to provide HCV care, namely family physicians practicing in urban areas and those who do not care for any IDU patients. Training and continuing medical education programmes that aim to shift family physicians' attitudes about the provision of HCV care by promoting their roles as integral to HCV care could contribute to easing the burden on consultant physicians and lead to improved access to treatment for HCV infection.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".