MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1978469870 · doi:10.1002/cam4.358

Primary care physician characteristics associated with cancer screening: a retrospective cohort study in Ontario, Canada

2014· article· en· W1978469870 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Medicine · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlobal Cancer Incidence and Screening
Canadian institutionsInstitute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's Hospital
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchOntario Ministry of Health and Long-Term CareInstitute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences
KeywordsPrimary careRetrospective cohort studyMedicineCohortFamily medicineCancerCohort studyPrimary health careEnvironmental healthInternal medicinePopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Primary care physicians can serve as both facilitators and barriers to cancer screening, particularly for under-screened groups such as immigrant patients. The objective of this study was to inform physician-targeted interventions by identifying primary care physician characteristics associated with cancer screening for their eligible patients, for their eligible immigrant patients, and for foreign-trained physicians, for their eligible immigrant patients from the same world region. A population-based retrospective cohort study was performed, looking back 3 years from 31 December 2010. The study was performed in urban primary care practices in Ontario, Canada's largest province. A total of 6303 physicians serving 1,156,627 women eligible for breast cancer screening, 2,730,380 women eligible for cervical screening, and 2,260,569 patients eligible for colorectal screening participated. Appropriate breast screening was defined as at least one mammogram in the previous 2 years, appropriate cervical screening was defined as at least one Pap test in the previous 3 years, and appropriate colorectal screening as at least one fecal occult blood test in the previous 2 years or at least one colonoscopy or barium enema in the previous 10 years. Just fewer than 40% of physicians were female, and 26.1% were foreign trained. In multivariable analyses, physicians who attended medical schools in the Caribbean/Latin America, the Middle East/North Africa, South Asia, and Western Europe were less likely to screen their patients than Canadian graduates. South Asian-trained physicians were significantly less likely to screen South Asian women for cervical cancer than other foreign-trained physicians who were seeing region-congruent patients (adjusted odds ratio: 0.56 [95% confidence interval 0.32-0.98] versus physicians from the USA, Australia and New Zealand). South Asian patients were the most vulnerable to under-screening, and decreasing patient income quintile was consistently associated with lower likelihood of screening, although less so for immigrant patients. This study highlights certain physician characteristics that are associated with cancer screening for eligible patients, including immigrant patients, and that should be considered when designing physician-targeted interventions. We have also highlighted an ethnic community, South Asians, which requires particular attention, both among its patients and its primary care providers. Future research should further explore the reasons for these findings.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.030
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.259 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it