A Comparative Study of the Impact of Certified and Noncertified Ophthalmic Medical Personnel on Practice Quality and Productivity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To compare ophthalmic practice productivity and performance attributes, as rated by employing ophthalmologists, of noncertified and three levels of certified ophthalmic medical personnel. METHODS: Three hundred eighty-five American and Canadian ophthalmologists in a clinic-based, stratified, random sample were surveyed regarding productivity performance and attributes of the ophthalmic medical personnel they employ. Instrument scales assessed 14 desirable professional attributes and 10 practice productivity measures. The attributes were credibility, reliability, competence, quality assurance, quality of patient care, knowledge base to make adjustments, increased skills (expertise), ability to work independently, broader knowledge base, ability to detect errors, ability to be trained to perform multiple roles in the practice, professional image, good judgment, and initiative and drive. The productivity measures were patient satisfaction, doctor productivity, trouble-shooting rapport, triage screening, effective patient flow, reduced patient complaints, increased referrals, number of patients per hour, revenue per patient, and patient follow-up. Participants indicated whether certified personnel more often showed these attributes and contributed to practice productivity measures as compared to noncertified personnel or whether there was no difference. Results were analyzed with a chi-square goodness-of-fit test. Survey reliability and validity were evaluated. RESULTS: Significantly more ophthalmologists responded that the three levels of certified personnel contributed more to 5 of the 10 practice productivity measures (i.e., doctor productivity, trouble-shooting rapport, triage screening, effective patient flow, and number of patients per hour). A statistically significant number of ophthalmologists also believed that certified personnel showed more of all 14 of the personal attributes considered desirable compared to noncertified ophthalmic medical personnel. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to noncertified personnel, the employment of certified ophthalmic personnel enhances the quality and productivity of an ophthalmic practice. Overall practice productivity is increased with certified ophthalmic medical personnel.
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 | 0.066 | 0.353 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".