Determinants of first practice location: among Manitoba medical graduates.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To help understand physician movement out of Manitoba by determining the factors that influence Manitoba medical graduates' choices about practice locations. DESIGN: Cross-sectional, within-stage, mixed-model survey. SETTING: Manitoba. PARTICIPANTS: All University of Manitoba medical graduates from classes 1998 to 2009 for whom we had valid contact information (N = 912 of 943 graduates) were invited in August 2009 to participate in a survey. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Demographic information; ratings, on a 5-point scale, of the importance when choosing first practice locations of 12 practice characteristics, 3 recruitment strategies, and 4 location characteristics listed in the survey; free-text narratives on unlisted factors; and estimates of likely practice location upon completion of training for recent graduates still in residency training. RESULTS: Completed surveys were received from 331 (35.1%) graduates of the surveyed classes, 162 (53.3%) of whom chose Manitoba for their first practice location. Multiple regression analyses indicated that graduates choosing Manitoba for their first practice location were significantly more likely to have done their residency training in Manitoba (P < .05), whether or not they gave a high rating to the importance of being near family and friends. Also, graduates choosing Manitoba were significantly more likely to be recent graduates (P = .007) and less likely to be members of a visible minority (P = .018). These associations were robust even when analyses were restricted to responses from practitioners without cause to estimate practice locations. Early self-selection of graduates during entry into specific residency programs, results of the residency match process, and "putting down roots" during residency years were 3 important interrelated themes identified through qualitative analyses. CONCLUSION: Residency education in Manitoba is the overwhelming factor influencing graduates' choice of Manitoba as their first practice location, regardless of graduates' rating of the importance of being near family or friends. Graduates' narratives provided insights into the complexities of choosing practice locations and enhanced the interpretive and theoretical validity of the study findings. More extensive studies involving all Canadian residents could further define the role residency location plays in physician practice location.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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; 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".