MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2197204303

Intrapartum care by general practitioners and family physicians. Provincial trends from 1984-1985 to 1994-1995.

2000· article· en· W2197204303 on OpenAlexaffabout
Janusz Kaczorowski, Cheryl Levitt

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMaternal and Perinatal Health Interventions
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityMcMaster University Medical Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNova scotiaEconomic shortageMedicineFamily medicineDemographyGeographyGovernment (linguistics)Archaeology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To determine provincial trends in provision of intrapartum care by general practitioners and family physicians (GP/FPs) for the 11 years from 1984 to 1995. DESIGN: Analyses of provincial Medical Care Fee-for-Service Utilization data for births from 1984-1985 to 1994-1995. SETTING: 10 provinces of Canada. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Proportion of vaginal births billed by GP/FPs (expressed as total number of vaginal births billed by GP/FPs divided by total number of vaginal births). RESULTS: In 1994-1995, the proportion of vaginal births billed by GP/FPs ranged from 77.2% in British Columbia and 70.8% in Nova Scotia to 28.9% in Ontario and 23.6% in Prince Edward Island. These proportions have remained relatively high and stable during the period studied in some provinces, such as British Columbia and Nova Scotia, and have declined steadily and notably in others. CONCLUSIONS: Data show that GP/FPs' involvement in vaginal births in most Canadian provinces is decreasing. This trend demonstrates a shift in GP/FPs' practice patterns and could indicate a coming shortage of obstetrical care providers.

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 score0.969
Threshold uncertainty score0.745

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.257 · 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

Citations26
Published2000
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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