Fibrosing colonopathy in an adult caused by over use of pancreatic enzyme supplements
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To establish the extent of Occupational Health (OH) service provision in the National Health Service (NHS). METHODS: Two postal questionnaires were used to obtain information from purchasers and providers in the NHS in England and Wales. RESULTS: 99.6% of trust and health authority employers claim to provide some form of OH service to their employees indicating widespread recognition of need, but virtually no service is provided to other staff such as general practitioners (GPs), general dental practitioners (GDPs), and their staff. There is a wide variability in the range and quality of OH services, suggested by the enormous differences in medical staffing levels, and the contractual restrictions where the OH service is provided by another NHS employer. Only about a third (highest estimate) to a quarter (lowest estimate) of NHS staff have access to a specialist occupational physician. CONCLUSIONS: Substantial inequality of access to OH services exists for the NHS workforce, despite previous guidance. There is no real evidence to suggest why the extent of provision of OH services varies so greatly between institutions.
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) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".