The first 25 years of the Northwestern Ontario Medical Programme.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: A tracking study of the undergraduate medical students and postgraduate residents who participated in the Northwestern Ontario Medical Programme (NOMP) during its first 25 years (1972-1997) was conducted to search for factors related to physician recruitment to Northwestern Ontario. METHODS: Annual editions of the Canadian Medical Directory were used to determine how many participants returned to practise in Northwestern Ontario. RESULTS: A total of 1982 (84.9%) of the 2335 NOMP participants were located using the Canadian Medical Directory. Of those located, 217 (10.9%) had established practice in Northwestern Ontario. Significantly higher recruitment rates (p < 0.001) were found for postgraduate residents (88/410 [21.5%]) than for undergraduates (95/1445 [6.6%]). Undergraduates who returned for multiple placements were significantly (p < 0.001) more likely to practise in Northwestern Ontario. Furthermore, significant differences in recruitment rates (p < 0.001) were found among the 5 Ontario medical schools. A "snapshot" of 1999 identified that undergraduate medical students and postgraduate residents who undertook a NOMP placement were significantly (p < 0.001) more likely to practise in Northwestern Ontario (odds ratio 7.11, 95% confidence interval 5.11-9.90) than those graduating from Ontario universities who did not experience a NOMP placement. CONCLUSIONS: Analysis of 25 years of student tracking data confirms that NOMP placements were significantly associated with physician recruitment to Northwestern Ontario. Recruitment rates from participation in NOMP were higher for postgraduate residents, undergraduate medical students who returned for multiple placements, and for undergraduate medical students from certain Ontario universities.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".