MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2125087211

In for the long haul. Which family physicians plan to continue delivering babies?

2002· article· en· W2125087211 on OpenAlexaff
Michael Klein, Ann Kelly, Andrea R. Spence, Janusz Kaczorowski, Stefan Grzybowski

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMaternal and Perinatal Health Interventions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaternity careMaternity leaveFamily medicineMedicineFamily planningNursingService (business)Health carePopulationEnvironmental health
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To compare characteristics of family physicians planning to discontinue or stay in intrapartum care. DESIGN: Self-administered questionnaire. SETTING: Department of Family Practice at Children's and Women's Health Centre of British Columbia. PARTICIPANTS: Ninety-five family physicians who attended at least one birth at the Health Centre between April 1997 and August 1998. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Intention to leave or stay in family practice maternity care, physician characteristics and beliefs. RESULTS: Forty-five percent (43/95) of family physicians planned to leave maternity care within the next 5 years. Physicians planning to leave had more negative attitudes about the alternative birthing centre, doulas, and practising in free-standing settings without on-site obstetricians; were more likely to report missing personal events because they had put their maternity patients first; were less likely to make housecalls during women's labour; and were more likely to be paid through fee-for-service. CONCLUSION: Being paid by fee-for-service, having negative attitudes toward non-traditional maternity care, and conflict between maternity care and personal life were associated with intention to leave intrapartum care.

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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.916
Threshold uncertainty score0.204

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.225 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations31
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicMaternal and Perinatal Health InterventionsFrench-language works237,207