Rural surgery in British Columbia: is there anybody out there?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To document surgical procedures performed in British Columbia between 1996 and 2001 at rural hospital sites with no resident specialist surgeons and to define the scope of practice of general practitioner (GP)-surgeons at these small-volume surgical sites. METHODS: We obtained data from published information available in the medical directories for British Columbia and from the Population Utilization Rates and Referrals For Easy Comparative Tables database (versions 6.0 and 9.0) to conduct a retrospective study of all rural BC hospitals with surgical programs that had no resident specialist surgeon and relied on GP-surgeons for emergency surgical care between 1996 and 2001. We studied surgical programs at the 12 hospitals that met inclusion criteria and interviewed the physician or nurse responsible for the program. Outcomes were measured in terms of the types and volumes of surgical procedures (elective and emergency) from 1996 to 2001, including itinerant surgery. RESULTS: On average, 2690 surgical procedures were performed annually at the 12 hospitals included in the study. Endoscopy, hand surgery, cesarean section, herniorrhaphy, tonsillectomy and dilation and curettage (D&C) were among the top elective and emergency procedures. For each hospital, between 8 and 26 procedures of hand surgery, cesarean section, herniorrhaphy, D&C and appendectomy were performed each year. In the 12 communities studied, 19% of all surgery was emergency and 81% elective. There was significant overlap in the types of emergency and elective procedures. GP-surgeons carried out most of the emergency procedures, which nonetheless accounted for a small portion of their surgical work. CONCLUSION: GP-surgeons still perform a significant number of emergency and elective surgical procedures in rural BC hospitals. This study defines useful procedures for GP-surgeons in communities without the population base to sustain a resident specialist surgeon. This information can be used to structure training programs for GP-surgeons that will adequately meet the needs of rural communities.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".