'Perimeteritis' and rural health in Manitoba, Canada: perspectives from rural healthcare managers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Rural areas in many parts of the world are facing issues such as economic restructuring, environmental degradation, aging, and depopulation. These issues impact the health and wellbeing of the people living in rural communities. The purpose of this study was to assess rural healthcare managers' understanding of rural community wellbeing. Specifically, definitions were sought for rural, community, health, wellbeing, and healthy rural community. METHODS: The research reported in this article is based on a set of interviews with each of the 20 healthcare professionals who either managed healthcare centres or administered specialized programs in the rural health care centres in the Assiniboine Regional Health Authority in southwestern Manitoba, Canada. RESULTS: Capitalizing on the open-ended structure of the interviews, respondents were thoughtful and philosophical in their responses. This produced a rich array of definitions of rural, community, health, wellbeing, and healthy rural community. In doing so, the struggles for rural communities in southwestern Manitoba were highlighted. The findings also illustrated that definitions of health and wellbeing do not fit standard biomedical or health determinant models alone. CONCLUSIONS: This study was a follow up to another study that employed focus groups to obtain rural resident perceptions of rural, community, wellbeing, and health in southwestern Manitoba. The study reported on here argued that the specific views of healthcare managers were necessary to further illustrate the complexities in understanding definitions of community and condition. The results are consistent with previous research on this topic in southern Manitoba and the recent literature in that there are no universally accepted definitions of rural, community, wellbeing, or health. Further, the study illustrated that professionals charged with managing healthcare services in rural Manitoba maintain very broad definitions of health and wellbeing. Most significantly, the determinants of health and wellbeing were central to defining individual and community condition and quality of life.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.031 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".