Primary care in Ontario, Canada: New proposals after 15 years of reform
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Primary care has proven to be extremely difficult to reform in Canada because of the original social compact between the state and physicians that led to the introduction of universal medical care insurance in the 1960s. However, in the past decade, the provincial government of Ontario has led the way in Canada in funding a suite of primary care practice models, some of which differ substantially from traditional solo and group physician practices based on fee-for-service payment. Independent evaluations show some positive improvements in patient care. Nonetheless, the Ontario government's large investment in the reform combined with high expectations concerning improved performance and the deteriorating fiscal position of the province's finances have led to major conflict with organized medicine over physician budgets and the government's consideration of an even more radical restructuring of the system of primary care in the province.
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 | 0.033 | 0.033 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.013 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".